1984 — Page 64

Page 64 of 233

92

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Despite the replication of procedure implied, the dual steps facilitate better focus on the campaigning personalities as they come to be known by the electoral college.

Use of Select Committees

The Green Paper suggests to introduce Select Committees in the Legislative Council to replace UMELCO Working Groups. Presumably, UMELCO Working Groups can be renamed Select Committees, which can adopt the model of Select Committees in the Urban Council, which are responsible for policy-making as well as implementation, and organized on a functional basis. Į am confident that the system of Select Committees, given the well-placed record of its commendable performance in the Urban Council, will serve the future working of the Legislative Council just as well.

Candidate Qualification

The liberal condition recommended in the Green Paper that the electoral college would be able to elect any candidates to the Legislative Council 'not necessarily from among their number' may give rise to another dilemma. Since elections to the Legislative Council will be held in 1985 while the Urban Council and the Regional Council will have their elections in 1986, a member winning a seat in the Legislative Council may lose his seat in a regional council election in 1986. Because members are not restricted to be elected from among their own number, he would still retain his seat in the Legislative Council, despite the loss of his fundamental mandate.

While the logic of going beyond the rim of the Electoral College for talents is less restrictive, I feel uncertain about the wisdom of electing Legislative Councillors from among those lacking credentials of experience in public offices. I am inclined to believe that the office holder as a District Board member or an Urban Councillor is the best first litmus on the candidate's suitability.

Future Outlook

Indeed, our search for the viable model of representative government should never allow us to lose sight of the fundamental cementing force of this community-stability. Hence, the steady pace proposed in the Green Paper is reassuring. We should look upon the proposals in the Green Paper as a first step in the experiment of indirect elections to the Legislative Council, while the District Board ballot system will continue to educate the electorate in the process of direct elections. In terms of time scale, I do think that an early review in 1987 is in order, leaving 1989 as yet another date for a second review.

I support the motion.

MR. STEPHEN M. L. LAU (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, first of all, I wish to express my support for the Green Paper on Representative Government which

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 64 of 233

93

not only deals with the prospects of an open, democratic system of government in Hong Kong, but also its stability and prosperity.

Now that the propositions of maintaining the status quo of Hong Kong for another 50 years after 1997 and 'one country, two systems' are a foregone conclusion, we should proceed with the course of democratization step by step. We should all forget the bounds of 1997 and, with pragmatic earnestness, seek to formulate a system-a capitalistic system that will safely tide us over the coming 60 years. We must first review our systems, past and present, which have enabled us to long enjoy an independent judiciary, freedoms of choice, speech and religion, and a free economy. A stable, enduring social system, the British government's long-standing assistance to Hong Kong's international trade and overseas travels, and city management, a reliable supply of inexpensive foodstuffs from China, the diligence and pragmatism of the people of Hong Kong have all contributed to these achievements.

Hong Kong shall enjoy a high degree of self-rule after the transfer of sovereignty and administration and we must refrain from attempting to form an independent government or introduce party politics as such hard-line policies will harm the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong. The future system of government should give overseas investments sufficient protection and local investors benefit so as to create more job opportunities and hence improve the living of the people. These are what a far-sighted administration should seek to achieve. Reuters reported on 17 August a speech by Mr. LEE Kuan-yew exhorting the Singaporeans to spare no efforts in the pursuit of economic development instead of democracy. Mr. LEE was quoted as saying, 'It is the policy of Singapore to place greater emphasis on economic development than democratic ideals. To maintain prosperity and stability, Singapore cannot afford to do otherwise. The people of Singapore should not blindly copy the West whose national characteristics and cultural traditions are quite different.' He further stated, 'The present political system of Singapore can only survive if it is constantly adjusted to social changes. Some Southeast Asian countries have suffered administrative inefficiency and slow economic development because they have accorded first priority to democracy. Singapore can only follow the examples of South Korea and Taiwan and place emphasis on economic development rather than parliamentary democracy.'

From Mr. LEE's words, we may understand that we should bear in mind the importance of economic development when planning future political reforms. We should seek co-existence with our trading partners. There is no reason why those professionals who have made contributions in the past by developing trade relations with London and other places cannot do so in the future with Beijing and other places, including London. And, as the professionals do not usually come from the grassroots, there is no reason why the system of appointment should not continue in 1991. They should be appointed to serve on the councils as long as they are lawful residents of Hong Kong, and are