Page 99 of 233
160
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
is characterized by the rule of law and elaborate planning, thus leading to stability. The laissez-faire economic policy and the policy of according top priority to the maintenance of prosperity have gained for Hong Kong, which lacks natural resources, miraculous achievements. Of course, the fact that Hong Kong people are intelligent, hard-working, good at doing businesses, highly adaptive and creative is another factor that contributes to the success of Hong Kong. Its success today is really the result of a combination of many factors. As Britain has long realized that colonial rule is coming to an end, the question is for her to make the best arrangements for Hong Kong so that she can account to the world and preserve her reputation without hindering her future cultural, economic and commercial exchanges with China. Such exchanges are now provided for in the Joint Declaration which also clarifies that Britain's interests in Hong Kong will be looked after 1997. The agreement is, therefore, beneficial to Britain.
That the agreement is concluded and meets with wide support is attributable to the marvellous idea of ‘one country, two systems’. To be frank, without such a concept, it would not have been possible to reach an agreement regarded by all sides as unexpectedly gratifying. The concept is in accord with history and reality and is also pragmatic. While no one doubts the sincerity of the two parties, many people fear that it may not be implemented to the end. These worries are indeed understandable. Most of those who feel worried are faithful to Hong Kong and hope that it will remain prosperous and stable for ever. It is like the anxiety felt by parents who hope that their children will have brilliant achievements. It is proper for them to speak their mind out. If only they do not become passive but continue or even double their past efforts in working for the prosperity of Hong Kong, future development will ease these worries. 'Prosperity' is the best weapon against 'changes'. In other words, 'the more genuine the prosperity, the less chance there is for changes'. Some people doubt whether the idea of ‘one country, two systems' will work. Who can guarantee there will be no changes after several decades? About these worries an authoritative person of the China International Research Institute once said, 'Regarding the development of human societies, it is now the time for coexistence of socialism and capitalism; in other words, one world, two systems'. Another authoritative person of the China Academy of Social Science also observed, 'It is not possible for us to formulate now social and economic policies to be adhered to sixty or seventy years later. Our future generations will, however, make their decisions in accordance with the social development, scientific rules and experience of the time.'
I wish to add a few points to what these two authoritative persons have said. After years of controversies, 'politics' has come to be regarded as a 'science'. As politics is regarded as a science, we should be able to make deductions from it by using scientific laws and principles. The principles of politics, like those of other sciences, are built on set conditions. Politics or otherwise, these principles will change according to conditions. As conditions of politics change frequently, so will the principles. Thus the marvellous concept of 'one country two systems' is also based on scientific grounds. This concept may be supported by Einstein's 'relativism'.
To make it simple, let me explain that nothing is absolute in this world. To apply this principle to politics, there is no absolute socialist system in the world, nor is there an absolute capitalist system. Thus even extremely capitalist countries such as Britain and United States embrace some features of socialism—social welfare and minimum wages. On the other hand, socialist countries such as Yugoslavia and Rumania have adopted capitalist practices of 'to each according to his labour' and private ownership of properties.
You may say that this is more to do with economics. As a most prominent economist once said, "The world economic situation is ever changing and there is no one set of economic policies that holds good for ever. There is therefore no absolute socialism or absolute capitalism.' In other words, capitalism may develop towards socialism and socialism towards capitalism.
If these theories are creditable at all, they may be used as support for the concept of 'one country, two systems' which is a pragmatic policy created in line with the circumstances. It will thus be seen that the chance for 'changes' will be minimal.
Since the initialling of the agreement, the people of Hong Kong have shown much concern over the future political systems and structures of the territory. There are also doubts about the compatibility of the proposals contained in the Green Paper with the future political systems as China has not been consulted on the proposals. The Sino-British agreement was reached when reforms on the administrative systems were being planned. It is, therefore, of utmost importance that the reforms to be introduced be in line with the political systems of the future 'Special Region', so that the impact would not be too great on transfer of authorities. When the people of Hong Kong have become used to the new systems, they would not notice the changes in terms of economic and other conditions. This will facilitate the transfer of government and maintenance of stability and prosperity.
In my opinion, China, and the government and people of Hong Kong all have a role to play during the transitional period and in the future stability and prosperity of Hong Kong. And, the tasks at the preparatory stage in particular should be the responsibility of the government and people of Hong Kong. The current practice of leaving all the planning and decision-making to the senior government officials is by no means a good arrangement. It is not a question of ability, but one of involvement and personal concern. It is also the beginning of democracy.
Page 99 of 233
161
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 99 of 233
160
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
is characterized by the rule of law and elaborate planning, thus leading to stability. The laissez-faire economic policy and the policy of according top priority to the maintenance of prosperity have gained for Hong Kong, which lacks natural resources, miraculous achievements. Of course, the fact that Hong Kong people are intelligent, hard-working, good at doing businesses, highly adaptive and creative is another factor that contributes to the success of Hong Kong. Its success today is really the result of a combination of many factors. As Britain has long realized that colonial rule is coming to an end, the question is for her to make the best arrangements for Hong Kong so that she can account to the world and preserve her reputation without hindering her future cultural, economic and commercial exchanges with China. Such exchanges are now provided for in the Joint Declaration which also clarifies that Britain's interests in Hong Kong will be looked after 1997. The agreement is, therefore, beneficial to Britain.
That the agreement is concluded and meets with wide support is attributable to the marvellous idea of ‘one country, two systems To be frank, without such a concept, it would not have been possible to reach an agreement regarded by all sides as unexpectedly gratifying. The concept is in accord with history and reality and is also pragmatic. While no one doubts the sincerity of the two parties, many people fear that it may not be implemented to the end. These worries are indeed understandable. Most of those who feel worried are faithful to Hong Kong and hope that it will remain prosperous and stable for ever. It is like the anxiety felt by parents who hope that their children will have brilliant achievements. It is proper for them to speak their mind out. If only they do not become passive but continue or even double their past efforts in working for the prosperity of Hong Kong, future development will ease these worries. 'Prosperity' is the best weapon against 'changes'. In other words, 'the more genuine the prosperity, the less chance there is for changes'. Some people doubt whether the idea of ‘one country, two systems' will work. Who can guarantee there will be no changes after several decades? About these worries an authoritative person of the China International Research Institute once said, 'Regarding the development of human societies, it is now the time for coexistence of socialism and capitalism; in other words, one world, two systems'. Another authoritative person of the China Academy of Social Science also observed, 'It is not possible for us to formulate now social and economic policies to be adhered to sixty or seventy years later. Our future generations will, however, make their decisions in accordance with the social development, scientific rules and experience of the time."
I wish to add a few points to what these two authoritative persons have said. After years of controversies, 'politics' has come to be regarded as a 'science'. As politics is regarded as a science, we should be able to make deductions from it by using scientific laws and principles. The principles of politics, like those of other
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 99 of 233
161
sciences, are built on set conditions. Politics or otherwise, these principles will change according to conditions. As conditions of politics change frequently, so will the principles. Thus the marvellous concept of 'one country two systems' is also based on scientific grounds. This concept may be supported by Enstein's
'relativism'.
To make it simple, let me explain that nothing is absolute in this world. To apply this principle to politics, there is no absolute socialist system in the world, nor is there an absolute capitalist system. Thus even extremely capitalist countries such as Britain and United States embrace some features of socialism-social welfare and minimum wages. On the other hand, socialist countries such as Yugoslavia and Rumania have adopted capitalist pactices of 'to each according to his labour' and private ownership of properties.
You may say that this is more to do with economics. As a most prominent economist once said, "The world economic situation is ever changing and there is no one set of economic policies that holds good for ever. There is therefore no absolute socialism or absolute capitalism.' In other words, capitalism may develop towards socialism and socialism towards capitalism.
If these theories are creditable at all, they may be used as support for the concept of 'one country, two systems' which is a pragmatic policy created in line with the circumstances. It will thus be seen that the chance for 'changes' will be minimal.
Since the initialling of the agreement, the people of Hong Kong have shown much concern over the future political systems and structures of the territory. There are also doubts about the compatibility of the proposals contained in the Green Paper with the future political systems as China has not been consulted on the proposals. The Sino-British agreement was reached when reforms on the administrative systems were being planned. It is, therefore, of utmost importance that the reforms to be introduced be in line with the political systems of the future 'Special Region', so that the impact would not be too great on transfer of authorities. When the people of Hong Kong have become used to the new systems, they would not notice the changes in terms of economic and other conditions. This will facilitate the transfer of government and main- tenance of stability and prosperity.
In my opinion, China, and the government and people of Hong Kong all have a role to play during the transitional period and in the future stability and prosperity of Hong Kong. And, the tasks at the preparatory stage in particular should be the responsibility of the government and people of Hong Kong. The current practice of leaving all the planning and decision-making to the senior government officials is by no means a good arrangement. It is not a question of ability, but one of involvement and personal concern. It is also the beginning of democracy.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.