TNAG-1722-FCO40-2415-Future-of-Hong-Kong-Basic-Law-1988 — Page 115

|

1832

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 13 July 1988

I do not think they have any place in a constitutional document. Nor do I think it wise to include them when nobody can foresee today what manner of fiscal problems will face future Financial Secretaries in years to come.

It would also seem to be contrary to the Joint Declaration to dictate policy matters in this way. It was agreed by the Chinese and British Governments that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government should decide its economic, trade, monetary and financial policies ‘on its own', and deal ‘on its own' with financial matters, including disposing of its financial resources and drawing up its budgets. Parts of Chapter V as drafted seem to undermine the autonomy that has been promised to the SAR.

So I hope that the drafters will look again at the line to be drawn-and I acknowledge the line may not be easily drawn-between those principles which must e part of the Basic Law in order to implement specific assurances given by the Joint Declaration, and those matters of policy which should be left for future SAR governments to decide on their own.

My fourth point concerns the need to allow room for future changes. Hong Kong is a dynamic society. Its only constant is change itself; change in the economy, changes to the needs and aspirations of its people, and in their awareness of community concerns and what can be done about them. There have been vast changes in the last 40 years. There have been changes in the last four years since the Joint Declaration was signed. And the pace of change is quickening all the time, in line with the speed of communications and travel.

It is therefore essential that the Basic Law does not have the effect of sapping Hong Kong's energies, or damping its dynamism. New trends, new changes of direction that we cannot imagine will have to be accommodated. A society that cannot change or does not change is one where there is no progress, and where stability is endangered. History shows us many examples.

Hong Kong has succeeded in the past because it has always been able to adapt quickly to change, both external changes in the world outside, and internal changes in the demands of its own people. It has done this by combining consistency of principle with a pragmatic development of policies. The Basic Law would serve us well if it is clear and firm on principles yet permits as much flexibility as possible in the future, consistent with the implementation of the Joint Declaration.

This need for flexibility has been recognised by the drafters. I am not surprised that the draft contains provisions for the amendment of the Basic Law in the future. Similarly, article 67 acknowledges that the way in which the legislative shall be formed may be modified ‘in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress'.

We have to accept that we cannot now devise perfect arrangements for 50 years to come. Although many will wish to see more not less spelt out in detail