There is something rather worrying about a community that seems afraid of discussing an important subject. National security is not an abstract matter; it is an issue that should concern every responsible citizen.
Moreover, in the case of Hong Kong, it is a specific constitutional duty. Article 23 of the Basic Law provides that the Hong Kong special administrative region 'shall enact laws on its own' covering treason, secession, sedition, subversion, theft of state secrets, activities of foreign political organisations and ties with such bodies.
The use of the word 'shall' means enacting the laws is obligatory. The phrase 'on its own' shows Beijing trusts us to perform such an important national task ourselves, and recognises the need for a sensitive approach compatible with our common law traditions. But are we worthy of their trust?
Public statements signalling that this matter is not a priority and carries no fixed timetable raise legitimate questions about our bona fides. There are some on the mainland who resent the special status Hong Kong enjoys and would like to see us pulled back into line. We should not be handing them fresh ammunition to use against us.
Given that some 500,000 people marched on July 1, 2003, to express their discontent with various government policies and activities - with draft legislation on Article 23 as the immediate trigger - then it is natural for the administration to be cautious. But an understandable need to be careful is not an excuse for paralysis. Those who led the opposition to the 2003 draft bill were right to highlight their concerns about the provisions as drafted. But they would be making a grave error if they tried to parlay that virtuous conduct into a permanent stay.
We are, after all, more than a quarter of the way through the period in which the Basic Law guarantees our way of life will remain unchanged. There is no reason in principle why the 50 years should not be interpreted as a minimum capable of infinite extension rather than a limit. But a prerequisite for that happy outcome would surely be our willingness to undertake those duties required of us. The Basic Law gives us so much, and asks of us so little in return, that it would be folly not to do so.