GOVERNOR Chris Patten yesterday dropped the strongest hint that if Britain failed to reach an accord with China, the bill he would submit to the Legislative Council will contain his original electoral proposals, because they still commanded popular support. Although reaffirming that Britain wanted a deal on the 1994/95 elections, Mr Patten repeatedly stated that he would rather go it alone than accept a bad agreement. Mr Patten said the Government would have to go ahead and put arrangements in place as best as it could in consultation with the Legislative Council. Conceding that such a situation would be unsatisfactory, he added: ''What would be worst of all would be a bad agreement - one that didn't guarantee either a through-train or fair and open elections.'' He also suggested China would have to think twice before deciding to dismantle the 1995 political structure in 1997. ''What the Government will want to do if we can't get that agreement is to put in place the arrangements which are most acceptable to the people of Hong Kong and to this Legislative Council,'' he said in his first Legco question time of the current legislative session. He said he would invite legislators to ''follow the lead'' he gave. Mr Patten noted that the original proposals had been endorsed in general - and in particular by Legco - and to date ''virtually every opinion poll'' had suggested substantial public support. ''And I note that the first opinion poll after my policy address suggested, I think, that 68 per cent of the people of Hong Kong were, broadly speaking, in favour of the approach that we have suggested to political development and 19 per cent were against,'' he said. The Governor ruled out the possibility of him tabling an electoral bill to Legco while talks were still going on. ''I think it is most likely that we will only be debating these matters either after there's an agreement, or after talks have concluded because we can't come to an agreement,'' he said. Asked if China would overturn the whole thing, Mr Patten said China should take into account the opinion of Hong Kong and the international community before it decided to dismantle the political system after the change-over. ''It would be up to China to decide what to do in 1997, but nothing that we've put forward seems to me to be unreasonable.'' He rejected the notion that he would compromise Hong Kong's interest in exchange for a good relationship with Beijing. ''If the only way in which the chief executive of Hong Kong can have a good relationship with China is by not standing up for Hong Kong, then I don't think that is a price which the community would wish me to pay. ''I think that Chinese officials should recognise that it is in Hong Kong's interest and in China's interest . . . to have a strong government in Hong Kong, to have a strong chief executive who gives a strong lead, and to have a government which stands up for the principles of the Joint Declaration,'' he said during the 11/2-hour session. Legislator Tang Siu-tong asked whether the Governor had tried to push for his electoral reform by trading off the airport projects, Container Terminal 9 and the work of the Joint Liaison Group. Mr Patten said abandoning the principles on electoral process would undermine the rule of law, the notion of an executive accountable to the legislature, the Legislative Council and its role. In a veiled attack on China, he blamed Beijing for the lack of progress in the airport projects and CT9, while stressing that the British side had done its best. ''Where else in the world do foreign secretaries, do senior ministers and officials sit down and spend their time arguing about airports and container terminals? ''Does anybody seriously think that it's in the interests of the Hong Kong Government, or the British Government is trying to slow up progress on the airport, the container terminal, the localisation of laws?'' said Mr Patten in a high pitch. ''It is important for everyone to recognise that these matters require agreement on both sides of the table. ''On our side of the table we are anxious to reach agreement as rapidly as possible. I can't speak for what the views are on the other side of the table,'' he said.