THE intention of my Legco motion on Wednesday is not to discuss the merits or demerits of Governor Mr Chris Patten's proposals for political reform.
The purpose is to question the wisdom of introducing reforms which have no chance of surviving beyond June 30, 1997 - an act which has created uncertainties detrimental to the Hongkong business environment.
The motion - that Mr Patten should not introduce his reform package to Legco - is not meant to be a political gesture. It is the last chance for responsible legislators to save us from disaster, considering the sensitivity the package has created in the business sector.
The timing of the Governor's constitutional package was a sensitive one. If Mr Patten goes ahead and introduces it into Legco, it will be deemed an act of confrontation by the Chinese Government.
The Governor has been told where his package conflicts with the Basic Law on many occasions, before and after he delivered his policy speech.
When the Governor visited Beijing, he had a six-hour meeting with Mr Lu Ping, the director of the Chinese State Council's Hongkong and Macau Affairs Office. I cannot imagine that during the marathon session no one pointed out to Mr Patten where the proposal failed to comply with the Basic Law.