1251
4.47 p.m.
Hong Kong
[LORDS]
Lord Geddes: My Lords. I too would like to thank my noble friend Lady Chalker for repeating the Statement. I endorse very strongly the sentiments expressed in it. When we had the opportunity on 9th December last year to debate the situation in Hong Kong and China a number of varying views were expressed. The remarks that I made on that occasion were interpreted as being in some ways critical of the Governor. If they were so critical, it was criticism of the style of his approach rather than the content of it, and particularly of his taking with him what I and others described as a Westminster approach.
In the Statement repeated today, and indeed in that made by the Governor last Friday to the Legislative Council, everything-with one slight exception, which I shall come to shortly-gave just the facts of the matter. I will not waste your Lordships' time by repeating what my noble friend said, but the efforts to have talks were to be based on the Joint Declaration, the Basic Law and understandings between the parties. The Statement then went on, I think most unfortunately, and my noble friend repeated it, that in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government and the Governor that approach-namely, the Patten pro- posals--was considered to be “wholly compatible”. That may well be, and I am sure that that is the view of Her Majesty's Government and the Governor. But it strikes me that it was gratuitously provocative to make such a statement when everybody knew what the situation was.
Be that as it may, the situation that has now arisen is one that we all feared at the time of our debate last December. There is no excuse for the Chinese to exclude Hong Kong representatives from the talks; there is no excuse to break off the talks if they are "without preconditions". I strongly urge my noble friend to impress on her right honourable friend, and indeed the Governor, to do everything possible to get the talks under way again, basically because, as the noble Lord, Lord Richard, said, it is the future of the people of Hong Kong that is at stake and that is what
matters.
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, I agree with my noble friend on many matters except for one point. I must repeat a Statement made in another place and therefore cannot change the words said by my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary. But the difficulty we faced-I remember the debate of 9th December -was that a number of people were inclined to challenge the fact that the Governor's proposals were compatible with the Joint Declaration, the principle of convergence, the Basic Law and the relevant understandings and agreements reached between Britain and China. I am sure it was for that reason that it was written in both to the Statement and to the words used by the Governor on Friday last.
However, we should draw a distinction between the publication of the legislation and its introduction. We can only decide on its introduction in the light of subsequent developments. There is no reason why publication or even consideration of the draft legislation by LEGCO should be a barrier to talks. We
Hong Kong
1252
know that the legislative process will take months and we hope to get the talks started. But it is absolutely right that we should be discussing the electoral arrangements in Hong Kong not only with the Hong Kong people because it is in their interests that they should be secured for continuity in 1997-but also with China. We still hope and intend to do so.
Lord Gridley: I rise to support the Minister in the Government's proposals for dealing with the Chinese. For a number of years I have been present in countries about to obtain their independence. I have seen how Britain goes to tremendous lengths to obtain an understanding of those for whose welfare she will soon not be responsible. I cannot see what objection can be taken to a request by Her Majesty's Government that China should discuss their proposals with them.
If I may say so, we got rid of the British Empire without a shot being fired. Surely that is some credit to us. There may have been difficulties in some countries concerning the carrying out of their responsibilities after they accepted them, and they have our sympathy in that regard; but, if the Chinese know anything, they know what it is to shake one's hand over a difficulty, whether in a contract or other situation which they wish to establish with the other side. I ask that we continue in the same constructive and conciliatory manner and try to persuade them to come to the table to discuss the position. Our intentions are to obtain a peaceful settlement, of which we have more experience than many other people in other parts of the world.
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for those remarks. It is only when one sits down to understand the issues in detail that one realises how much time and trouble has been taken not only by the British Government but also by the Governor, his staff and members of LEGCO with the draft proposals. I underline that they are “draft” proposals.
Difficulty will always arise when one party approaches an issue with a preconceived idea, which is what I can only conclude must be the situation over this matter. As the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, said a few moments ago, it is an attempt to test out the seriousness both of the British Government and of the Governor. But as many noble Lords said, both in this exchange and in previous debates, the essential requirement is that the electoral arrangements shall be fair, open and acceptable to the people of Hong Kong. Without that, the democracy will not be the democracy for which we and they have worked. That is what must be achieved.
Lord Elton: My Lords, the approach towards democracy by Hong Kong has absorbed the interest of this House and another place, the Government and perhaps the British people for some time. That is partly because of the historic role we play in introducing democracy in countries around the world, and in part by the events we saw some time ago in Tiananmen Square and our belief that we had a duty
642 LD75/18 Job 3-4
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.