167
British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill
1990
17 M
HOUSE OF COMMONS
[Mr. Foulkes] have been doing for many years. They are still doing so, because it continues to be run as a colony instead of being given the democracy that it increasingly calls for.
The Minister did not answer my question about accountability, but it was picked up by the hon. Mem- ber for Hertford and Stortford, who added a point about the ministerial system. There was no clarifi- cation of the position of the chief executive and his underlying structure and their accountability to the Legisliative Council. It is a pity that the Minister did not elaborate on those matters.
The hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford also referred to a Bill of Rights. I did not do so because that would have taken us into an important detailed dis- cussion which, perhaps, the Committee should have. had. The hon. Gentleman did well to remind us of the importance of a Bill of Rights and the delay in implementing promises that were made, especially by the now deputy Prime Minister, Lord President of the Council and Leader of he House-Pooh-Bah. The right hon. and learned Gentleman made a statement about a Bill of Rights in the halcyon days when he was Foreign Secretary. I do not know how may houses he had then, but he certainly enjoyed himself much more on those occasions. He made great promises about a Bill of Rights which seem to have been ground into the dust. It may be understandable that I should be more preoccupied about corsets than the Minister, who I know pays regular visits to the House of Commons gym. I would do well to emulate him in that, but I think that the point is well made.
The hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford rightly said that the joint declaration does not say that the Legislative Council might be democratically consti- tuted, but that it should be constituted by elections. The Minister said that we are talking about democracy of the type with which we are familiar. We refer to universal adult suffrage when we talk about a democ- racy. Everyone should participate in the election of the whole of the Legislative Council. That is my under- standing of the word "democracy" and anything less than that is imperfect. Our Parliament has a second Chamber, which is not democratic.
Mr. Maude: I accept that there is not full democracy unless the whole of the Legislative Council is elected by universal suffrage. That is why we have urged, and the Basic Law now provides for, further movement beyond 1997 towards that very desirable goal. That does not mean that the provision in the basic Law is inconsistent with the requirement of the joint declar- ation that the legislature be constituted by elections. As the Basic Law provides every member will be elected, but to begin with, only a proportion of them will be directly elected by universal suffrage.
Mr. Foulkes: I do not wish to be semantic, but my understanding of the words "constituted by elections" is that they refer to direct elections. I have never really understood the functional constituency which seems a less than adequate substitute for direct elections.
I was a wee bit worried when the Minister said that the fact that Hong Kong had survived and done extra- ordinarily well without democracy might be a lesson
Standing Committee A
168
for the Opposition. We have always worried that the Prime Minister might have it in mind to do away with elections here.
Mr. Maude: I cannot let the hon. Gentleman get away with that. I said that Hong Kong had done well without politicians, which might be a lesson for us. I did not have the hon. Gentleman in mind when I made that remark; the thought was prompted by what he sub- sequently said.
Mr. Foulkes: I am grateful.
Mr. Wells: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the functional constituencies as presently constituted enfranchise less than 1 per cent of the total population of Hong Kong? Those functional constituencies will hold a majority in the Legislative Assembly. How can anyone maintain that an assembly constituted by elec- tion should include functional constituencies which enfranchise so few people?
Mr. Foulkes: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for pointing that out. There is no logic that explains why one group of social workers, not another pro- fession, should have a representative. It is a strange, undemocratic device. The latest draft of the Basic Law states that legislation needs a majority of both types of councillor the directly and the indirectly elected. That is worrying, and I hope that it will not be included in arrangements between now and 1997, even if it is envisaged beyond 1997. The functional constituencies may have served a purpose in the past, but they have no purpose in the future.
While the Minister was speaking, my hon. Friend the Member for Edunburgh, Central (Mr. Darling) asked me privately why we cannot move immediately to 100 per cent of directly-elected representatives. Countries in eastern Europe that had no democracy are moving immediately to 100 per cent. That has happened in Latin America, and is happening elsewhere. Why do we have to have a slow, tedious incremental process in Hong Kong? That is a valid question.
Mr. Maude: It is a good question. It has a simple answer. We can move straight to full democracy and a 100 per cent directly-elected Legislative Council. We could do that next year. There is no problem about that except the certainty that it would be reversed in 1997.
Mr. Foulkes: That brings me neatly to the crux of the Minister's argument. He said tht it was certain to be reversed. He is stunned by Peking's comments about the Bill. In answer to the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford, the Minister said—I shall try to get what he said right—that he did not want to prompt China into saying that it would reverse anything that we did. I see no evidence whatever to suggest that, either directly or behind the scenes, we should move faster, with arm twisting and pressure on China. I can under- stand that we should not say, "To hell with China, but we need some evidence that pressure is being applied and that, some dialogue is taking place to bring the People's Republic of China along. We do not want to be on a collision course with China, but we should be
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.