Time for decision
EVENTS this week promise to be critical in deciding whether Hong Kong develops the improved democratic machinery unveiled by Governor Chris Patten more than 16 anxious, angry months ago. They also could trigger even more turmoil in the tumultuous Sino-British relationship. And they will present members of the Legislative Council with the biggest test of their maturity. For Legco finally will begin the process of consideration debate and decision on Mr Patten's political reforms.
Stage one of the reform bill will go before Legco on Wednesday - for voting. Subject to agreement by the Executive Council tomorrow, the Government then will publish a White Paper setting out Britain's version of the breakdown of the political talks withChina. It will follow this step (subject again to Exco approval) by gazetting stage two of the reform legislation - the contentious bill which would allow for a big extension of voting rights.
With the breakdown of the talks, after 17 rounds, it is hard to see how the Government could have followed any other course. It is entitled to present its view of the talks - and China has already given its version. And it would be a mockery of the democratic impulse behind the reform plans to refuse to present them to the representatives of the people for their final say. Legco - which is part popularly elected, part indirectly elected and part appointed - is a body of stunted democratic form and legitimacy: if it were otherwise, Mr Patten's reform proposals would never have emerged. But it is Hong Kong's only representative institution able to debate the proposals and decide on them.
Legco's first task will be to decide on the stage one reform bill. This covers the four so-called non-contentious matters among Mr Patten's reforms. What has been published so far on the talks indicates that China and Britain were close to agreement on three of the issues - lowering the voting age to 18 years; abolishing appointed seats on district boards and municipal councils and letting Hong Kong members of the National People's Congress sit in Legco. There should be no controversy about these proposals.
The fourth ''non-contentious'' issue is a matter of argument. This is the single-seat, single-vote system for territory elections - similar to that used in Britain. It is democratic in the sense that every elector is able to cast a vote for the candidateof his/her choice. But it can produce some undemocratic results: when there are large fields of candidates, the winner may have attracted only minority backing. Some countries have adopted different voting systems to get around this drawback.
The most common involve proportional representation (where more than one candidate is returned from each electorate, giving representation to different candidates according to the proportion of votes cast for them). China would prefer proportional representation. But there are many such systems and it has not said which one it supports. The single-seat, single vote system at least has the virtue of being Legco's choice. Despite the non-controversial nature of much of the stage one bill, Legco will have weighty matters to consider.