Page 70 of 233
1
104
Page 70 of 233
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
105
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
ADDRESS BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):—Ladies and Gentlemen, the meeting is called to order. The debate on the Green Paper on the Further Development of Representative Government in Hong Kong which was adjourned from Tuesday's meeting, is now resumed. Each speaker will be allowed to speak for not more than 15 minutes.
DR. PHILIP C. K. Kwok (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I agree with the setting up of a truly representative government which caters for the well being of the whole society and not just a particular stratum or profession.
It does require much thought on how to attain these aims. Direct elections as practised in the Western countries are, I am afraid, representative only in name. Whether they are, in reality, truly representative of the people is debatable. For example, a constituency may have five or six candidates with the one elected securing only about 20% of the votes. Can he or she then claim to be representative of the whole constituency?
Another question is: if in future all Legislative Councillors are directly elected, it may lead to the situation whereby the councillors elected are from only a few professions or career politicians who have little understanding of the other circles. Will such a Legislative Council be capable of really safeguarding the interests of the various trades and professions and maintaining the prosperity of Hong Kong? Or will their decisions adversely affect the balanced development of society?
Hong Kong is in a rather unique situation. Its value depends on whether it can maintain its stability and prosperity. We are reforming the present system of government not for the sake of change, but to create, through appropriate channels and not by mere chanting of slogans, a truly representative government. We wish to preserve Hong Kong's brilliant achievements in the fields of commerce, industry and international finance, and make it more prosperous and stable.
I think Hong Kong should have its unique form of democracy. We need not accept in full the unconstrained democratic systems of the West which have already brought about numerous social problems. If we are not cautious, democracy may likewise bring problems to Hong Kong.
I therefore consider that in future, the Legislative Council should be composed of directly as well as indirectly elected (including representatives elected by functional constituencies) and government appointed members, in order to cater for the interests of all. Hong Kong people will then have confidence in the Legislative Council, and stability and prosperity will continue.
I support the motion. (Mr. Frederick K. K. FUNG, Miss Cecilia L. Y. YEUNG and Mr. Augustine S. K. CHUNG arrived during Dr. Philip Kwok's address.)
MR. WALTER M. SULKE (in English): Mr. Chairman, in rising to support the motion before this Council, I want first of all to sum up the views about the Green Paper of the great many people I have made it my business to talk to during the last month: Almost all of them prefer direct to indirect elections, but most of them are afraid to go too fast and so as a compromise most of them accept the idea of an electoral college to elect some of the members of LEGCO but would like an equal number of members of LEGCO also elected by direct election. None of them like the idea of functional constituencies and they were about evenly divided as to whether the appointed system should continue or not. I am afraid most of them showed considerable ignorance as to how any Government works and specifically how our Government works. And most of them said that they would vote in elections if it was convenient to do so, but they doubted whether they would go out of their way to vote.
Now, if I may, I would like to give my personal view of the Green Paper and first of all I want to deal with the basics: Direct versus indirect elections.
The reasons many elected colleagues and also some of our appointed colleagues give for their preference for direct election are two-fold:
One, that it is more democratic.
Two, that it will be a means of reinforcing Hong Kong's distinct identity after 1997.
The first reason is arguable. There are many direct election systems which are completely undemocratic. For instance those practised in Russia and her satellite countries and in many of the South American and African Republics. Also, often the results of direct elections in the developed democracies, such as the U.K. and the U.S., do not reflect the true will of the people. In a country like Switzerland where not only is there direct election, but every major question has to be taken to a Referendum, most of the time less than 35% of the electorate vote. So even there the true will of the people is not known. Personally, I don't think that the results of voting by an electoral college or voting by direct election will greatly differ in Hong Kong so I am fairly neutral on this issue.
But what concerns me is the naive expectation of many of our colleagues that this type of democracy, especially by direct election, will be a defence against our new landlords. I think this is a huge mistake. Although I can see two systems in one country working as far as economics is concerned, I really cannot see two systems in one country working in the political field. Just imagine the people of Shanghai and Tientsin pointing to Hong Kong and saying: If Hong Kong can be democratic why can't we? So I ask my elected colleagues to be
Page 70
Page 71
Page 71 of 233
Page 70 of 233
1
104
Page 70 of 233
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
105
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
ADDRESS BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):-Ladies and Gentlemen, the meeting is called to order. The debate on the Green Paper on the Further Development of Representative Government in Hong Kong which was adjourned from Tuesday's meeting, is now resumed. Each speaker will be allowed to speak for not more than 15
minutes.
DR. PHILIP C. K. Kwok (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I agree with the setting up of a truly representative government which caters for the well being of the whole society and not just a particular stratum or profession.
It does require much thought on how to attain these aims. Direct elections as practised in the Western countries are, I am afraid, representative only in name. Whether they are, in reality, truly representative of the people is debatable. For example, a constituency may have five or six candidates with the one elected securing only about 20% of the votes. Can he or she then claim to be representative of the whole constituency?
Another question is: if in future all Legislative Councillors are directly elected, it may lead to the situation whereby the councillors elected are from only a few professions or carcer politicians who have little understanding of the other circles. Will such a Legislative Council be capable of really safeguarding the interests of the various trades and professions and maintaining the prosperity of Hong Kong? Or will their decisions adversely affect the balanced development of society?
Hong Kong is in a rather unique situation. Its value depends on whether it can maintain its stability and prosperity. We are reforming the present system of government not for the sake of change, but to create, through appropriate channels and not by mere chanting of slogans, a truly representative government. We wish to preserve Hong Kong's brilliant achievements in the fields of commerce, industry and international finance, and make it more prosperous and stable.
I think Hong Kong should have its unique form of democracy. We need not accept in full the unconstrained democratic systems of the West which have already brought about numerous social problems. If we are not cautious, democracy may likewise bring problems to Hong Kong.
I therefore consider that in future, the Legislative Council should be composed of directly as well as indirectly elected (including representatives elected by functional constituencies) and government appointed members, in order to cater for the interests of all. Hong Kong people will then have confidence in the Legislative Council, and stability and prosperity will continue.
I support the motion. (Mr. Frederick K. K. FUNG, Miss Cecilia L. Y. YEUNG and Mr. Augustine S. K. CHUNG
arrived during Dr. Philip Kwok's address.)
MR. WALTER M. SULKE (in English): Mr. Chairman, in rising to support the motion before this Council, I want first of all to sum up the views about the Green Paper of the great many people I have made it my business to talk to during the last month: Almost all of them prefer direct to indirect elections, but most of them are afraid to go too fast and so as a compromise most of them accept the idea of an electoral college to elect some of the members of LEGCO but would like an equal number of members of LEGCO also elected by direct election. None of them like the idea of functional constituencies and they were about evenly divided as to whether the appointed system should continue or not. I am afraid most of them showed considerable ignorance as to how any Government works and specifically how our Government works. And most of them said that they would vote in elections if it was convenient to do so, but they doubted whether they would go out of their way to vote.
Now, if I may, I would like to give my personal view of the Green Paper and first of all I want to deal with the basics: Direct versus indirect elections.
The reasons many elected colleagues and also some of our appointed colleagues give for their preference for direct election are two-fold:
One, that it is more democratic.
Two, that it will be a means of reinforcing Hong Kong's distinct identity after 1997.
The first reason is arguable. There are many direct election systems which are completely undemocratic. For instance those practiced in Russia and her satellite countries and in many of the South American and African Republics. Also, often the results of direct elections in the developed democracies, such as the U.K. and the U.S., do not reflect the true will of the people. In a country like Switzerland where not only is there direct election, but every major question has to be taken to a Referendum, most of the time less than 35% of the electorate vote. So even there the true will of the people is not known. Personally, I don't think that the results of voting by an electoral college or voting by direct election will greatly differ in Hong Kong so I am fairly neutral on this issue.
But what concerns me is the native expectation of many of our colleagues that this type of democracy, especially by direct election, will be a defence against our new landlords. I think this is a huge mistake. Although I can see two systems in one country working as far as economics is concerned, I really cannot see two systems in one country working in the political field. Just imagine the people of Shanghai and Tientsin pointing to Hong Kong and saying: If Hong Kong can be democratic why can't we? So I ask my elected colleagues to be
Page 70Page 71
Page 71 of 233
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.