The Senior Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, has enthusiastically advised Tung Chee-hwa about how to rule Hong Kong and how to deal with the Chinese Government after the sovereignty handover (South China Morning Post, May 13 and 17). The political reforms introduced by Governor Chris Patten were harshly criticised by Mr Lee. He commented that they were 'too much, too late'. I was puzzled why Mr Lee said Hong Kong people were enjoying 'too much' in the way of political rights. The colonial governor was appointed by London and only 20 out of 60 seats of the legislature were directly elected by universal suffrage. In other words, there are still restrictions in terms of democracy. Compare this to Singapore, where the people can choose their president and parliament by election. Some people, including Mr Lee, may argue that Hong Kong is not an independent state, so it should not have such rights to elect its chief executive and legislature. However, why should we not be allowed to do so? Even in some villages in mainland China, the leader of the community is picked through 'one person one vote' election by the whole village. I do agree that London acted too late. In 1948, before its independence, there were already multi-party elections in Singapore. Our first taste of elections, albeit indirect ones, was in the 1980s. Nevertheless, our society works well and with cohesion and there is no evidence to show that Mr Patten has brought chaos to society, or that our rights have been abused. He has transformed the civil service and introduced principles of openness, accountability and efficiency. Even supporters in the pro-Beijing lobby have not been able to deny this. Mr Lee claimed the leaders of Hong Kong ought 'to focus on business and forget about political reforms if they want to retain Beijing's confidence'. I think Mr Lee has his head in the sand. First, reforms are needed for a progressive and competitive society. Such reforms should not be exclusive of politics. Second, it is not healthy to gain confidence from Beijing by ignoring reforms. Confidence, in my opinion, could and should be obtained through communication. Our leaders are obligated to explain our views to the central Government and persuade it to accept them. If this is done, it will enable Beijing to feel a greater degree of trust and enhance the PRC leaders' understanding of Hong Kong. Moreover, Mr Lee's suggestion to Mr Tung that he should be 'doing all the unpleasant things early and giving people a clear understanding of the basis on which he will govern' makes my hair stand on end. I wonder if Mr Tung has adopted Mr Lee's 'admirable plan', as he is reputed to be an admirer of Singapore, which has a tightly controlled political system. Mr Tung has already announced the restoration of draconian laws and will reintroduce appointed seats into the post-handover municipal and regional assemblies. Mr Tung will take his office of chief executive with the Basic Law, effective on July 1. This symbolises the end of the colonial rule and a new page of Hong Kong history. I believe he will be a respected and credible leader of Hong Kong if he pays more attention to what the community says, and listens to statesmen from abroad. GAVIN KWOK Tsuen Wan
