Enough has been said about the illegality of the provisional legislation. Martin Lee Chu-ming, Elizabeth Wong Chien Chi-lien, Emily Lau Wai-hing, the United States and Britain are all opposed to it. They all advocate that, because the present legislature was democratically elected, it should survive the handover of sovereignty.

I thought it was established during the 1995 elections that the electoral system was contrary to article 24(4) of the Basic Law. The electoral system allowed electors who were not or could not be permanent residents to vote but the Basic Law states that only permanent residents have a right to vote. I remember the Government's answer at the time was that the Basic Law did not apply since it takes effect only on July 1, 1997. It stands to reason that on this day the current Legislative Councillors who were all elected contrary to the Basic Law must step down.

How can Britain and the US say we should allow the present Legislative Council to stand? Given that Chris Patten has tampered with the electoral system since the signing of the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law without China's agreement, who can blame the new government for wanting to scrap the 'Patten voting system'? SALLY CHAN Kowloon