Patten should practise what he preaches what he preaches
GOVERNOR Chris Patten managed to force his controversial 1992 political reform package through the Legislative Council after much arm-twisting and intimidation, and with the help of the three ex-officio members, answerable only to him.
The 29-28 vote, with two abstentions against the bid by the Liberal Party to water down the reforms, was hardly a convincing victory, and while the voting is over, the debate continues.
How different would history be if the three Sir Humphreys of Lower Albert Road had abstained? Or if Mr Patten had truly allowed the other 56 members, who are under no obligation to dance to the Governor's tune, to decide the council's destiny? I was stunned by the high-handedness of the attack which Mr Patten launched in the Sunday Morning Post (June 26) to discredit the Liberal Party's political reform package, at a time when he sensed support for his measures was in danger of waning by the minute in the days leading up to last Wednesday's vote.
Did not the Governor claim time and again that his 1992 package had received the unreserved support of the overwhelming majority of the people of Hong Kong? Yet a survey conducted by T. Y. Chung of the Hong Kong University Social Sciences Research Centre just before Wednesday showed that 92.4 per cent of residents did not have a clue what it was about.
Almost two years after the 1992 package was introduced, and notwithstanding the huge government propaganda mechanism behind it, only 2.7 per cent said they supported it.
If Mr Patten continues to mislead the public by claiming his package has widespread support in the face of these findings, I can only gravely suspect his integrity.