TNAG-1720-FCO40-2400-Hong-Kong-1987-Review-of-Representative-Government-1988 — Page 35

14.

CONFIDENTIAL

-5-

Prior to the 1985-86 session, meetings of LegCo were almost entirely prescripted. Answers to questions and speeches were circulated in advance. Members, official and otherwise, rarely departed from their prepared texts when delivering their speeches. In the past 3 years there has been more spontaneity, particularly on major issues, although set texts still remain the norm. There has also been a greater tendency to challenge the President's decisions on procedural issues. This means, almost for the first time, that the President (i.e. the Governor) has to be ready to deal, often without warning, with a variety of politically loaded points of order and needs to have ready access to advice on legal, constitutional and procedural issues.

What the public does not see

15.

scenes.

Much of the real work of LegCo is done behind the At the time of writing (admittedly at the busiest time of the LegCo year) there are a total of 16 ad hoc groups

This studying Bills and other matters of public interest. is where the detailed discussion and argument takes place and where the Government has to negotiate, amend or even withdraw its proposals. The time required for studying Bills naturally varies. Some straight forward ones go through on the nod. More complicated and controversial Bills can take months of work. The ad hoc group studying the recent Film Censorship Bill, for example, held a total of 37 meetings with officials and others before the Bill was taken to a formal meeting of the Council for its second reading.

16.

One result of this system is that appointed and elected members now have effective control of certain aspects of the business of LegCo. Most Bills, except for a small handful of private bills, are introduced into the Council by the official members. But the timing of their enactment is then, to a large extent, in the hands of the appointed and elected members. From its minority position in LegCo, the administration cannot force bills through. It would be unwise to try to do so except in the most extreme circumstances, and even then this would have serious political effects. It is necessary therefore to wait until a consensus in support of each Bill, or in support of particular amendments to it, can be achieved in the ad hoc group and then ratified in the weekly in house meeting not necessarily an automatic endorsement. This method, time consuming though it is, has its positive side. Scrutiny of Bills by the non-official members has generally produced consensus. Several Bills have been improved in the process. The fact that discussion and amendment have taken place makes controversial legislation more acceptable to the general public. And if, at the end of a long period of discussion, there are still dissenting voices, the number is generally reduced to a handful. The Government have not yet. "lost" any important proposals.

/The Film Censorship

CONFIDENTIAL