TNAG-1856-FCO40-2631-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-memoranda-and-minutes-of-me-1989 — Page 87

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE

COUNCIL

5 July 1989

香港立法局

————————一九八九年七月五日

71

anything we had to say. The fact that he left Hong Kong last night unwilling to hear 34 of our Members speak this afternoon on this issue further enhances that feeling.

Sir, democracy, so defined as direct elections, is no substitute for the right of abode in the United Kingdom. I reject the offer that our right to take up abode in Britain can be traded in by earlier direct election. It is a bargain which no trader would wish to accept. In short, it is no bargain. Although Hong Kong is full of traders, they would not buy this trade-in. Not at any price.

To give us earlier, premature direct elections will not keep out the People's Liberation Army. The tanks and guns could not be diverted with the vote. We should be aware of the limitations of this vote. The vote is after all, a means, not an end.

The British administration will depart from Hong Kong in a few short years. For them, it is far easier to offer us the shadow of democracy than to give us the substance of the right of abode. Hong Kong people need and want the substance, not the shadow.

If right of abode were granted, then Britain would be forced to make a success of Hong Kong. The fact of the matter is that the incentive to make Hong Kong a continuing success is obvious. The price of "failure" here simply would be the prospect of having something between 3 and 6 million Hong Kong emigrants. If, however, we are given the vote, rather than the right of abode, then Britain can enjoy the convenience of relaxing, while things go well or ill. We could be told: "Hong Kong, that is your problem. We are not responsible for the consequences. You have the quick and easy fix of early direct elections. You have made your bed, now lie on it."

The argument for gradual change in our political system still holds good. The need for responsible Members representing functional constituencies is still very evident. What happens in China, or indeed, elsewhere is not always relevant to the pace of local political change here. China's problems are, of course, our problems. But the speed at which we move forward is not determined solely by external events.

The brain drain is hardly likely to be influenced by the early introduction of one-man-one-vote elections. At the present rate of emigration, we are likely to lose 500 000 people over the next eight years. One wonders how many of them will leave on account of the structure of our voting system.

f