The Catskinner by Rcheydn - HTML preview

Chapter Twenty-Six

On November 27, 1987 it was confirmed that Brigit was pregnant.

On February 10, 1988 at ten thirty in the morning and with just four witnesses present, Jason Teller and Brigit Rolanne were married. It rained on that day and many people said it was an omen for the future of Hong Kong.

Not because of the wedding that passed without notice, but because also on the afternoon of that day the Hong Kong Government issued the White Paper on political development for the years ahead. The brief document, which ended nine months of divisive debate and anxiety, was tabled in a solemn Legislative Council.

In prefacing its decisions the administration stressed that the present system of representative government had evolved gradually over the years, consisting of three separate but interconnected tiers at district, regional and central level. This three-tier structure had proved itself to be well suited to Hong Kong’s requirements and the public response to the earlier Green Paper was strongly in favour of retaining it.

Of course, as was already widely appreciated, of all the questions raised in the Green Paper the subject of direct elections to the Legislative Council produced by far the greatest public response. And the bulk of those views favoured introducing directly elected members into the legislature.

It was plain, stated the document, that there was a strong trend in public opinion in favour of developing the system to include a directly elected element at the central level of government and doing so well before 1997. But the precise timing of such a move was not so clear. Views were sharply divided.

Also as expected the administration gave a rather detailed preamble by way of explanation before spelling out its conclusions. Stable government, it said, had always been crucial to the success of Hong Kong and it would remain crucial in the years leading up to 1997 and beyond. Stability was essential for confidence in the government and in the future of the territory, as well as for overseas business confidence in Hong Kong.

“The maintenance of stability requires that the development of Hong Kong’s system of representative government should continue to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary,” it said, and “that each step should be carefully considered, that changes should command wide support and confidence in the community,”

It went on: “Such evolution must also be compatible with a smooth transfer of government in 1997. There will be inevitable changes in that time. The interests of the community will be best served if there is also a high degree of continuity and the form of government is one with which the people of Hong Kong are already familiar.

“In considering the development of Hong Kong’s system of representative government before 1997, account must therefore be taken of the relevant stipulations in the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the deliberations of the Basic Law Drafting Committee over how those provisions should be implemented after 1997. In this connection the government has taken note of the fact that all the options in the latest draft of the Basic Law concerning the election of the future legislature include an element of direct elections.”

Considering all the factors, the government concluded that the introduction of a number of directly elected members into the Legislative Council before 1997 would be a logical and desirable further step in the development of Hong Kong’s system of administration. This meant that in all ten members would be voted into the council directly by the people. However, they would not be elected as representatives in 1988.

“The government has decided,” informed the White Paper, “to introduce directly elected members into the Legislative Council in 1991.”

So Martin Lee and his fellow democrats had lost the battle. The government had made its policy views clear. It remained unclear however what the relationship would be between the Legislative and Executive Councils, and the people of the territory would  have to wait three more years before they were given any further indication what future administration they might expect.

One thing was certain though. The five and a half million inhabitants of the prosperous territory knew that on July 1, 1997 the world as they knew it, with all its uncertainties and upheavals and promises, would end. In its place would be a new world, an unknown world, a world which many eagerly looked forward to, yet which many feared.

They had been unaware on October 7, 1987 that they had already been pawns in a potential catastrophe that had been avoided. Would they avoid the one that some saw looming on the horizon?

Time in Hong Kong had always been the most precious and elusive possession. Now it was trickling away faster than ever. For nearly a century and a half the Chinese residents of Hong Kong had known they were living a borrowed life, that ultimately their future and the future of generations to come would not be the same. Even after one hundred and thirty of those years had passed there was little conscious concern devoted to this state of affairs. The territory was buoyant and life was lived to the full with the emphasis being on today and not tomorrow.

A decade later, in the 1980s, all this had changed. The subconscious acknowledgement of what their fate held was replaced with the certain knowledge that the life expectancy of their daily routine really did have a limit on it and that limit was clearly visible on a nearing horizon. Only a dozen years remained. Only a dozen years to plan their own lives and for the lives of their children and children’s children.

In 1988 the frequent cry was that while the administrators in Hong Kong, Britain and China insisted on gradual, steady political development, the real fact of the matter was that the fundamental decisions already made had been too hasty. The claim that there was still nine years to run and that this was ample time to do what had to be done to protect and safeguard the principles of the 1984 Joint Declaration, was suspect.

The reality was that 1997 was a ceremonial year only when the Union Jack would be lowered and the emblem of the People’s Republic of China, or least the flag of the Hong Kong SAR, raised. On July 1 a world event would take place that was almost inconceivable.

The ultimate free society, the most capitalistic society on the earth, would be handed over, freely, by the world’s oldest democracy to the world’s largest communist regime which had committed some of the most ruthless atrocities against its own people and western ideology a mere thirty years before. The act would be undoubtedly one of the historical events of the century.

*

At the height of the following summer a long time expatriate resident sat in the popular Bull and Bear Pub in the busy Central district of Victoria Island. Across the table from him was a Chinese, a friend of many years. European waitresses in green skirts and white blouses served drinks and meals to customers at a hectic pace.

The Chinese sipped his beer and leaned forward. “You know,” he said, “we’ve been sold down the river. And I feel angry.”

“I agree,” said the expatriate. “Political expedience has taken the place of moral considerations. Even common sense. But there is nothing you can do about it. The politicians have signed the documents.”

“We needed more time,” said the Chinese. “I can’t understand the hurry. Everyone knows what’s going to happen. The exodus is already on. People are scared and they’re running away. Most of them to Canada and Australia.”

The expatriate nodded. They had had similar conversations on many occasions.

“You know,” his Chinese friend continued. “the British and Chinese governments have sentenced us to a premature death.”

“Premature?” quizzed the expatriate. “How do you mean? Ninety-seven has always been unquestioned. I know it’s earlier than everyone would like but legally you can’t say it’s premature.”

“Let’s not talk about the law or what’s in the Joint Declaration or the treaties of the last century. Let’s look at the facts as they are now.” The Chinese took another sip from his glass. “In 1991 the Basic Law will be introduced. Everyone says we’ll know then what our future will be for the promised years to 2047, for fifty years after 1997.”

He reached into his pocket and removed his wallet. He took out a five hundred dollar note and carefully tore it in two, handing half to his friend. He went on solemnly: “You hold on to that. I’ll tell you what Hong Kong’s future will really be. Between 1991 and 1994, give or take a year, this place will falter. It will continue to boom until then, but if you own property sell it before the end of next year. If you are thinking of settling overseas eventually, start making plans now. Don’t leave it any longer. 1997 is not the crucial year. 1991 to 1994 is the time.” He sat back and looked around at his surroundings. “If I’m wrong I’ll give you the other half of the note.”

The expatriate looked at his friend. The inscrutability of the Chinese face was no longer in evidence. The skin was drawn tight and there was a redness creeping into the whites of his eyes.

He dropped his gaze. “I’m sorry,” he said softly.

“I’m sad,” said the Hong Kong Chinese. “And I’m hellish damn angry.”