Hong Kong handover is not about democracy

On the eve of Hong Kong's handover to China, Peter Ungvari and Kim Anderson of the Hong Kong News Analysis group, at ANU's Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies give their views.

China will not be treading on democracy in Hong Kong. It is not possible to tread on something that never existed.

As Ronald Li, former Chairman of the Hong Kong Stock exchange, put it: "Hong Kong is a colony. It is a dictatorship, although a benevolent one. It is and has been a British colony, and it's going to be a Chinese colony, and as such it will prosper."

From the creation of the first Legislative Council (LegCo) in 1844, until the historic elections in 1995, all LegCo members were appointed by the Governor to their positions.

Even after the 1995 LegCo, its role has not been to initiate or draft legislation. Before legislation is introduced into the LegCo, the Executive Council approves principal legislation and it is responsible for overall policy direction. The Executive Council is, and always has been, a fully appointed body without any electoral responsibility to the people of Hong Kong.

LegCo has a subordinate position in the structure of government. Although it is technically possible for LegCo to initiate legislation, it does so infrequently and even if it does, without the final approval of the Governor the bill does not become law.

The Governor, together with the Executive Council, are the authoritative decision makers in the Hong Kong government, and although most of their decisions are legally subject to ratification - mostly by LegCo - in reality this is achieved without any difficulty.

What should be remembered is that the cold hard reality of the matter is that on July 1 1997, the People's Republic of China will take control of 6 million people who have never experienced democracy under the 150 odd years of British rule.

Interestingly, the Provisional Legislature set up by China contains all the current LegCo members who were prepared to work with China on issues relating to Hong Kong's future. The only group missing is Martin Lee's democrats.

Hong Kong is a commercial city, it has always been so, and it will always be, whether under British colonial or Chinese rule. The highly idealistic notions of democracy do not fit well into this society with its "Money is God" mindset.

In the end, what it comes down to is a choice between economic freedoms and political ones. Seeing the latest economic statistics coming out of Hong Kong, it would seem that the people of Hong Kong, for the moment, have judged economics to be more important than politics.

If the Hong Kong Democratic Party and Britain are really concerned about the average Hong Kong resident, the best they can do is to stop trying to embarrass China over the issue of Hong Kong - for that will only harden the resolve of the Beijing leadership.

This is most definitely not a suggestion that all should kowtow to China; it is simply a suggestion to allow China an opportunity to demonstrate that it is capable of keeping its word.

It should be remembered that in Hong Kong, the silent majority are the ones that have no means of leaving if things go awry, and incidentally, it is also this same majority who have never bothered to vote.

If the West continues to ignore China's opinion in this matter, Hong Kong will suffer in the long run, and popular resentment will most likely be aimed at "gweilos" (Cantonese term meaning "foreign devils") for interfering in internal Chinese matters, not Beijing.

Hong Kong's future is with China. The people of Hong Kong seem to have accepted this fact some time ago. With this comes the understanding that for continued economic survival it is not in Hong Kong's interests to rock the boat. The quicker Western commentators understand this, the better for Hong Kong in the long run.

Democracy, with increasing education and living standards, will come to Hong Kong - possibly even to China. One thing is certain: the final hour move by Governor Patten to elect LegCo - referred to as "Patten's Potty Proposals" in a 1993 article in the respected South China Morning Post - did not deliver democracy to Hong Kong.