ln general, those who called for direct elections argued in terms of the need to prepare for self-administration. As the chairman of the Civic Association and an elected member of the Urban Council, Hilton Cheong-leen put it in a speech to a symposium organized by the Hong Kong Affairs Society on 12 August which well represented this view
although the Green Paper does not make specific recommendations for the period from 1991 to 1997, I think t h a t the aim should be for self-administration or internal self-government to be arrived a t sometime between 1991 to 1994, and not to wait until 1997.15
He argued t h a t logically the government “should review the possibility of having direct elections in 1988” . At the same conference, his opinion was echoed by a pressure-group leader, Szeto W ah, who was also the chairman of the Hong Kong Professional T eachers’ Union, and who identified direct elections with the notion of democratization of the political system before 1997. Szeto suggested a count-down theory (Daoshao Lun), according to which a democratic self-government should be established well before 1997, and so direct elections should be introduced as soon as possible to enable the practice to be smoothly inherited by the post-1997 government. Szeto’s argum ent was strongly supported bv the grassroots and community organizations.
In a debate in the Legislative Council on the Green Paper on 3 August, a group of unofficial appointed members also criticized the government for not com m itting itself to a precise tim e-table for political reform. While Selina Chow called for a change in the advisory sta tu s of the Executive and Legislative Council, Lydia Dunn suggested a ministerial system which would allow elected representatives to have real power over the decision-making process. Both unofficial members, however, addressed the need to evolve a system which was responsible and accountable to the public. As Miss Dunn said, “people must be convinced their future elected representatives have real influence and this can be achieved through executive responsibility.” Another appointed unofficial member, Allen Lee, even pointed out t h a t a democratic political system was essential to secure public confidence in the Agreement. In the symposium organized by the Hong Kong Affairs Society on 12 August, he reiterated the position of the Young Professionals of May 1983 by putting forward the worries of Hong Kong people a b o ut a drastic political change after the British withdrew in 1997. He argued th a t as 1997 approached, the political system of Hong Kong should be democratized. Significantly, though as an industrialist, Allen Lee did not share the fears of the other businessmen t h a t the existing
15. Hilton Cheong-leen, “Political Leadership, the Electorate and D eve lopm e nt o f the Political S yste m ” , a speech to the sym posium , organized by the Hong Kong Affairs Society (12 August, 1984). See also W a h K i u Yat Pao (19 July, 1984) which reported that 12 out of 15 elected m em bers in the Urban Council supported direct elections to the Legislative Council.
economic operation of Hong Kong would be jeopardized by direct elections and political reforms. He argued t h a t Hong Kong's international s ta tu s and free enterprises could only be guaranteed and sustained by a comparatively open political framework. (For a brief information about the members of the Executive and Legislative Council of 1984-85, see Appendix D.)
The liberal views of these unofficial Legislative Councillors gave an incentive to the democratic movement stirred up by the grassroots organizations. Immediately after the Green Paper was published, a public campaign was launched by the grassroots and pressure-group leaders to seek equal opportunities for participation in the political process. Those grassroots leaders who were elected to the district boards and Urban Council in 1982 and 1983 lobbied other colleagues and, on 20 July, thirteen of them, such as Fung Kin-kee, Lee Chik-yuet, Chui Kim-ling, Lam Chak-piu, etc. joined forces to call for direct elections, thus representing an echo to the public campaign from within the political system. Outside the official political mechanisms, pressure-group and grassroots leaders a tte m p te d to build up a united front to demand direct elections. A letter to the editor of the South C hina M orning Post in August typified the public response to such an effort
given t h a t sovereignty will be surrendered to the m ainland, the people of Hong Kong m ust now commence the difficult task of building a proper and recognizable social entity based on democratic principles. To a tta in this objective, all essentially democratic political forces m u st compromise and present to the outside world a united fro n t.10
A Joint Conference, in which 90 community groups participated in Septem ber, marked the high tide of this effort at coalition, all of them urging direct elections to be implemented no later than 1988.
The conservative sector of the society was, however, sceptical about the argum ent for establishing a democratic government before 1997. In the Legislative Council, members like Roger Lobo, Henrietta Ip, Pauline Ng. Peter Wong and Ho Kam-fai, called for a ^cautious, m oderate and gradual approach” towards political reform. They agreed with the government th a t it should not commit itself to introduce direct elections in 1988; whether direct elections should be implemented in 1988, would entirely depend upon “the circumstance of Hong Kong” a t th a t time. In a debate in the Legislative Council on the Green Paper (3 August, 1984). Bill Brown and Stephen Cheong expressed their concern about sustaining economic confidence. Others, such as Yeung Po-kwan, emphasized stability and continuity, while Hu Fa-kong defended the efficiency of the existing adm inistrative system. Peter Poon even expressed his reservations about