On Wednesday, Chris Patten, the 28th and last British Governor, will deliver his fifth and final policy address to the Legislative Council. No doubt he will use the opportunity to sum up his achievements, as well as to make suggestions to his successor. I have often said that Mr Patten is the best Governor Hong Kong has ever had. This is not difficult because the others were so awful. Amongst other things, Mr Patten will again take credit for opening up government and making it more accountable, increasing spending on social and education programmes and improving protection for civil liberties. Few people would disagree that the five-year agenda launched by Mr Patten shortly after he arrived in the summer of 1992 consisted of programmes which should have been implemented decades ago. Mr Patten's efforts in 1992 were too little, too late. Had even a limited form of representative government been introduced before the Sino-British negotiations on the future of the colony began in 1982, the history of Hong Kong would have been quite different. In castigating Britain for its failure to introduce democratic reform in Hong Kong decades ago, I am painfully aware that the local people also have to share part of the blame for not demanding it. Democracy does not fall like manna from heaven. This week two members of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) are in town at the invitation of the Government. On October 23 the UNHRC will hold a hearing in Geneva to take a final look at Britain's efforts in implementing the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in Hong Kong. Despite the Government's public relations tactics, the two UNHRC members should be able to detect the grim future of the Hong Kong people's civil and political rights. Even the Governor's silvery tongue cannot hide the fact that the ICCPR is not being fully implemented. Continuing implementation after 1997 looks bleak because China is not a party to the covenant, and has said it will not submit reports on Hong Kong to the UNHRC. It is not certain when and how the next elections for the Legislative Council will be held, and whether they will be by universal and equal suffrage. Many members of the pro-democracy lobby are pessimistic and fear democratic elections will not be held for many years to come. Faced with the might and intransigence of the Chinese Communist Government, the British would only say that, if China reneges on the promises and obligations made to the Hong Kong people in the Sino-British Joint Declaration, it would have some explaining to do. Such a lame response is infuriating. In the past few months, the row over the Diaoyu Islands has dominated the news. If only the activists would channel part of their fervour into the local pro-democracy cause, democracy might materialise earlier. But the British will only be too happy to see local people venting their nationalistic feelings at China and Japan. In this way, Britain can withdraw quietly, without stirring up much bitterness and resentment. As the saying goes, the people get the government they deserve. If the people are chiefly preoccupied with showing patriotic emotions over issues relating to China and are reluctant to demonstrate similar enthusiasm for local causes, they should not be surprised at the attitude of Britain and China. Like human beings elsewhere, Hong Kong people are a bundle of contradictions. However, if they lose sight of the community's key objectives, they run the risk of undermining their own existence.
