From: cw@orion.uucp (C.W. Chung)
Subject: Re: Airport Project in Hong Kong
Organization: Objectivity Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 22:11:26 GMT

In article <3957@wyse.wyse.com> hwoo@wyse.wyse.com (Hsien Woo x2305) writes:
>cw@orion.uucp (C.W. Chung) writes:
>: In article <11365@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> anthony@cs.uq.oz.au writes:
>: 
>: HK UST is an easy target.  The LegCo and the media can pick on any
>: other projects which does not have powerful political backing.  
>: However, when it comes to the biggest project in the history of HK,
>: pushed and  100% backed by the British Govt, it is a different story.
>
>Either you dont know how democracy works or you dont find out the details
>and use pure speculation in your arguement.

I fail to see how you jump to this conclusion, and I welcome any enlightenment.

>If you think the directly elected member does not fullfill their duty, then
>dont vote for them the next time. If most people think they are not doing a
>good job, they will be throw out of the Legco. Question them if you think 
>they are wrong, ask for an explaination. 

Sure, but by then the die has been cast and money is gone.  (Well, with
the current political debate, may be not :-)

Also, please remember it is not just a 'yes/no'  vote to the record of
an incumbent.  The voter often has to choose 'the lesser between the
two evils', and also consider the record of many issues in an incumbent's
term. 

>No one can guarantee you that a direct elected member will do what you think 
>is right, but you how have a chance to kick him/her out. I dont see how the
>British government can threaten a directly elected member ? They can only
>control the appointed ones as appointed member's manday is from the HK 
>government and not from the Hong Kong people. That is why we need more 
>directly elected seats. 

I don't think I have ever used the word 'threaten'.  The govt does not have
to threaten, just apply the political skills like pressure, persuasion and
bargaining to achieve its objectives.

Actually, the govt can't even 'control' the appointed members of LegCo.  Can
you see many of the appointed members votes against the govt's proposal
in the last two ballots?  The appointed members theoretically should vote on
behalf of the interest of HK and not on behalf of the govt. even though 
they are not directly elected.  The members elected by the functional 
groups, however, often has to vote on behalf of the interest of
the group they are representing.

>But if you dont vote, or you dont try to get the right so that you will be
>properly represented in the government, next time there is something you 
>dont like about what the Hong Kong government did to you dont complain.

Voting is only part of the process that make it work.  I suppose most
of the schk netters are residing in USA or elsewhere and cannot 
vote in HK.  Does it mean that we should shut up on all the affairs
of HK?  I hope you are not implying this.

Actually, the way direct-elected work in HK, you could vote only
in the region where you reside.  So you have a say in one out
of the 18 direct-elected members only.

-cw-
From: yuk@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Yuk Lun Chan)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 11:38:18 GMT
Subject: Re: Two different people? (Was Re: DATA: largest world economies)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, CCSY Messaging Centre, UK.