009
[Mr. Andrew Faulds]
Hong Kong
20 JANUARY 1988
Kong itself who were unhappy — always unhappy - about the inevitability of China reclaiming its own after 1997. they are usually the well heeled and, under the admirable capitalist system of Hong Kong, they have not done too badly. They can afford the luxury of a funkhole somewhere else and they have, of course, the requisite passports and tickets ready to hand. If the future turns difficult for them, they can up and go. Their commitment to making the agreement work is somewhat less than wholehearted.
Then there are those in the West, public opinion formers and parliamentarians in particular- we have them here tonight—whose traditions endorse and whose purpose depends on the cross in the ballot box. They disregard or perhaps conveniently forget that in all the years of colonial government, in spite of our commitment to the electoral ballot, we were diligent in denying it to our subjects in Hong Kong. Now the parliamentary majority are loud in their demand for direct elections now,
this year.
Most of us forget, too we are not well enough versed in knowledge of the history of other peoples, one of the unhappy developments of the abandonment of empire — that China and Chinese people everywhere have totally different cultural and social traditions from ours. The concept of democracy is at variance with their political thought over the many centuries of Chinese life. China, both Confucian and Communist, has shown a long respect for authority and social order not perhaps ideas that we in the individualist West are too committed to or have too much respect for.
-
I accept the arguments of those of our Hong Kong friends-some of us have a number of friends in Hong Kong-who say there is no need to rush into elections, that gradualism and convergence will work out best for the true interests of the great mass of the Hong Kong populace who do not have a ticket and a passport to get out.
It is quite clear that public opinion in Hong Kong is very sharply divided on the speed of introduction of direct elections and I am sure that the “direct elections this year” factions are largely the Westernised people who have very much fallen under the influence of European attitudes. I believe that those who want to hasten slowly are the great bulk of the populace in Hong Kong who still feel the ancient attachment to China and to Chinese values. That is as, I believe it, it should be.
The first draft of the Basic Law is to appear, I gather, in April this year. I suspect it would be advantageous to all the parties, if the Chinese were to accept a move to some proportion of direct elections to Legco.
Dr. Bray: I am sure that my hon. Friend would not wish to do an injustice to the people of China. He must be aware that the people of China have gone through tremendous trauma recently and that it was that trauma which led most of the population of Hong Kong to go where they went. It is against that background of recent history that the matter is being resolved in Hong Kong and China. I think that my hon. Friend is showing remarkable insensitivity to that fact.
Mr. Faulds: No. I am moderately aware of that, but I think that the longer lesson of history is that, whether we like it or not, and whether the people of Hong Kong like it or not, they will be subsumed by China, and the more gracefully that happens, the happier their lot will be.
Hong Kong
1010
10
I hope that the Chinese will agree to something like a 25 per cent. proportion of direct elections. It would not be a bad figure to settle on. The British Government, as we know, are committed to an element of direct elections, but they did not spell it out in a timetable. I personally consider that it would be wiser to wait for that development till 1991 when the Basic Law, which, after all, is going to be the basic fact of Hong Kong's life and future, has been promulgated.
A proposal of a 25 per cent. introduction of direct elections in 1991 would still give some years of practice of democratic conduct of Hong Kong affairs. I should be very concened indeed for the prospects for the agreement and for our relations with China if there were to be too precipitate a move to a much larger proportion of direct elections.
A Government which has the responsibility in 1997 to take over Hong Kong has a legitimate interest in how things evolve politically—a point made by one of our Hong Kong friends. This is where convergence of developments with the Basic Law is so crucial, indeed critical, to the future of Hong Kong. Nothing could be worse for the future, both politically and economically, than for the introduction of changes before 1997 which the then Chinese Government might have to unscramble— and, of course, they would have to suffer the opprobrium of the international community if that were to happen.
Finally, there is another risk factor in rushing into direct elections. Party politics are all very well in our old democracies regardless of the damage the swing of the pendulum often does to the real interest of the people concerned. But if direct elections were to lead to party politics in Hong Kong, the damage would be immense. There would be really only two parties involved-in our sense of party politics-and they would the Communists and the KMT. Imagine what turmoil of instability that would lead to.
I believe that by far the most sensible course for us to urge in Hong Kong is to trust the Chinese Government's integrity in their intentions. They have listened to Hong Kong opinion. They were not at first really prepared to do so, but they have done so. They have taken part in very constructive consultations, and they continue to do so. They want a stable and successful Hong Kong for their own national reasons the continuation of China's reconstruction and her economic progress and, of course, the reclaiming of Taiwan.
We should always remember that China, under a variety of governmental systems, has historically observed its obligations. I believe that all will be well-I am by nature an optimist, but I think that we have good reason in this case--and that unwise pressures from this House or this Government could do nothing but harm to Hong Kong's stability and success, and that is what we must be most concerned about.
6.30 pm
Mr. Alastair Goodlad (Eddisbury): I begin by strongly supporting my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath) in his eloquent plea for further urgent action to remedy the problem of Indo- Chinese refugees in Hong Kong. This country has a proud record with regard to the number of Indo-Chinese refugees that it has accepted through Hong Kong and with regard to our efforts in orchestrating their resettlement elsewhere.
A
น
ir
И
h
t!
C
I
I
1
1
522
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.