29
Hong Kong
15 MARCH 1993
Tiananmen square. One can argue about the right pace of progress towards democracy in Hong Kong. The pace which we, the former Governor and the present Governor have set in hand is about right. The principle is endorsed by the Chinese Government themselves. We are asking them to discuss with us the way in which that principle, which they accept, is put into practice between now and 1997 so that in 1997 the arrangements in place should continue.
Mr. Roger Sims (Chislehurst): As one who has known Hong Kong for 30 years, may I endorse the view of my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary that the pressure for democratic reform in Hong Kong is relatively recent but is now quite strong? Is he aware that the position that he and the Governor have taken on this matter has the support of hon. Members on both sides of the House who believe that the people of Hong Kong are entitled to be represented in any talks that take place and who find it wholly unreasonable that the People's Republic of China should object to talks simply because it cannot dictate who should represent the British side?
Mr. Hurd: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Those are exactly the points. I hope that those of us who share those points can, during the next few weeks which may in some respects be difficult, hoid to those points and make them clear to Chinese friends with whom we speak and to people in Hong Kong. It is very important that there should be the minimum of misunderstanding and confusion in Hong Kong or Peking about the part of this country and this House. I hope that today's exchanges will make that clear.
Mr. Geoffrey Hoon (Ashfield): What does the Foreign Secretary make of the Chinese Government's insistence that Governor Patten's proposals are in direct conflict with the Basic Law?
Mr. Hurd: The Governor's proposals are designed to take account of two points of view which the Chinese Government have put to me and to many others with great emphasis. First, they were not prepared to see an increase in the number of directly elected seats beyond 20 as provided for in the Basic Law. The Governor's proposals respect that. Secondly, the Legislative Council should not be changed in nature, and the Governors' proposals respect that. We therefore took into account both the main points that the Chinese had quite legitimately impressed on us as their view. The Governor found a way, while respecting those points, modestly but clearly of advancing democracy. The Chinese should accept the effort that has been made as a basis for discussion-as something that should be discussed. That is what we have proposed, but so far they have not accepted it.
Sir Fergus Montgomery (Altrincham and Sale): Does my right hon. Friend agree that the proposals for democracy in Hong Kong up to the year 1997 are in the interests of China because they would underpin inward investment? Will he pass on to the Governor the good wishes of all hon. Members, irrespective of which party they belong to, who are very concerned about the future of the people in Hong Kong?
Mr. Hurd: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The Governor has a difficult position. In some ways, it is bound
25 CD41/5 Job 2-1
Hong Kong
30
to be a difficult position and, in the present circumstances, more difficult than usual. He will be very grateful for what has been said in the House, and in particular for my hon. Friend's personal good wishes.
Mr. Robert N. Wareing (Liverpool, West Derby): Were not Baroness Thatcher's Government taken for a ride when they signed the joint declaration? Are not the Government being naive in thinking that the perpetrators of what happened in Tiananmen square will support democracy in Hong Kong any more than they did in Beijing? As the joint declaration was underwritten by the United Nations, at what point might the Foreign Secretary consider taking the matter back to the United Nations?
Mr. Hurd: The hon. Gentleman may be mistaken. The best agreements are those that rest on self-interest, and it is in the self-interest of China that it should take over in 1997 and be able to sustain a promising, prosperous city. That depends, in turn, on keeping alive in Hong Kong the entrepreneurial spirit, which rests on a degree of freedom of speech and on the growing institutions of democracy. This is not something theoretical for China: properly considered, it is in its self-interest. We will do what we can -I am not sure that the hon. Gentleman's tactic would be the right one-to bring that point home as often as we can.
Mr. Cyril D. Townsend (Bexleyheath): Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that many hon. Members in all parts of the House have noticed the contrast between the reasonable tones that are being adopted by himself and his fellow Ministers and those of the Chinese Government, and in particular of its ambassador in London? Such hectoring comments hardly help to achieve the settlement that we all desire.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is essential, at this sensitive time in the history of Hong Kong, that the people of Hong Kong are properly represented in the talks and that deals are not done behind their backs because it is their future that we are talking about?
Mr. Hurd: I agree with my hon. Friend's second point. On his first point, I would not like to point a finger at any individual, but the tactic of attempting to hector or dissuade by argument British individuals or firms from taking a particular line misfires, and I hope that, if it has been practised, it will be discontinued.
Mr. Clive Soley (Hammersmith): Does the Foreign Secretary share my concern that there is a growing coincidence of view between some very rich and powerful business men in Hong Kong and the Chinese communist party on having capitalism but not democracy against which the opposition in Hong Kong seems to be most effectively orchestrated? Is not it time that we said, loudly and clearly, that coincidence of views is not shard by the British people?
Mr. Hurd: I am impressed by the degree of support which the Governor's proposals have continued to hold in most parts of Hong Kong. That is because sensible, shrewd people in Hong Kong, in the business community and elsewhere, realise that Hong Kong is now a political community as well as a business community-both have to be taken into account.
Mr. Iain Duncan-Smith (Chingford): I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement and I agree that these moderate proposals are such that we hope that the Chinese
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.