A Politicians Approach

The right man, probably for the wrong time. That is how Mr Victor Chu, a Hong Kong businessmen with strong connections on the mainland, describes Mr Chris Patten, Britains last colonial governor.

Mr Patten brought refreshing changes to Hong Kong that exposed it to politics on a grand stage, he says the governor encouraged ordinary people to become more involved in civic and political affairs, but his relative inexperience of Asian diplomacy led him into arguments with Beijing that have complicated the reversion to Chinese sovereignty.

It is a typically ambivalent view of one of the most extraordinary governors Hong Kong has seen. From the day of his arrival- in a business suit rather than the traditional plumped helmet and ceremonial dress - Mr Patten made clear that he was different. His disdain for the trappings of office and predilection for walkabouts showed a style for removed from the aloof paternalism of the Foreign office functionaries who preceded him.

 

But then, his was a political appointment for a political task. The job of the last governor was not only to hand Hong Konk back in good working order with its freedoms preserved as far as possible, but also to extricate Britain with dignity from its last important colony. We dont have to leave at midnight on June 30, pursued down the gangplank by editorials in all the worlds major newspapers denouncing us for behaving in shameful way, he says.

In the short run, Mr Patten will probably be best remembered for his decision to proceed unilaterally with the democracy reforms that led to elections for a third of the seats in the Legislative Council in 1995, a move which Beijing regarded as going back on previous agreements with Britain.

Reviled by local business for picking what it regarded as an unnecessary - and economically damaging - fight with China, Mr Patten was also subject to vituperative attack by senior British officials involved in the original handover negotiations. They argued that the offense to China would wreck confidence and cause Hong Kong to end up with fewer freedoms than would otherwise have been the case.

The rights of the case are hard to judge, since both China and Mr Patten base their case on interpretation of earlier Sino-British agreements, from which the Basic Law, Chinas constitution for Hong Kong, is derived. China believes these committed the UK not to introduce political reform to which it had not previously agreed, and not to remove some of the repressive old colonial legislation on civil liberties before the handover.

Mr Patten has no regrets. It is sad, he says, that the Legislative Council elected under his democracy reforms is being abolished. The UK could have followed Chinas bidding, limited reform and excluded Beijings opponents from participating, but we would have taken the flak for three or four years, and I dont think that would have been conducive to political or social stability.

Underlying his approach, however, is something deeper, which is easily obscured by the emotional debate on democracy. Mr Pattens reforms were part of a broader effort to alert people both to the need for good government and to the responsibility of the ordinary citizen in demanding it.

In this, even some ctitics accord him respect. Most people would agree that in the past five years the government has become more accountable, more transparent, says Mr Tsang Yok-sing, the pro-Beijing politician. The morale of the civil service remains high and the government has remained very clean. In general people have a much clearer idea about the values of democracy, rule of law, clan government and a level playing field for all.

Mr Patten speaks with pride of the fact that, contrary to the dire predictions of five or 10 years ago, Britain is leaving Hong Kong in good economic order with low inflation and a strong budget. There is none of the galloping corruption that was predicted. The police are still in good shape. Crime is down. The civil service is still workingremarkably well in spite of the strains of the transition, as is the administration of justice.

I dont think the past two or three months have been entirely happy, but they have shown the professions, academics, newspapers - particularly Chinese language newspapers - and ordinary punters on phone-in programmes actually standing up for the decencies and freedoms that they have taken for granted, he says.

In stark contrast to his foreign office critics, Mr Patten believes that by making people aware of their democratic and civic rights and responsibilities, he has made it harder for China to trample on those rights after the handover, because the protests will be all the more vociferous. His critics would have liked to chloroform Hong Kong through 1997.

That hasnt happened, and I think Hong Kong will have more freedom as a result, no less.

But the price is a polarised society with deep divisions between supporters and opponents of China, just when many argue Hong Kong needs to stand united. There is also no guarantee that the exuberant pursuit of western-style adversarial politics will survive Mr Pattens departure. Even before the handover, he has become less relevant to those being left behind. Only time will tell, says Mr Chu, whether he will be remembered with affection or, chillingly, with indifference.

At least Britains last governor will be able to say he did his best to make the people of Hong Kong understand that their best chance lies in standing up for themselves and for the values under which they have prospered.