************************************

Following is a keynote speech (English only) delivered by the Acting Chief Executive, Mrs Anson Chan, at the Freedom Forum Dinner tonight (November 16):

Mr Pritchard, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,

Let me first of all thank you, Mr Pritchard, for those kind remarks. I am delighted to welcome you and your colleagues from the Freedom Forum to Hong Kong for this very important conference. I was particularly struck by the theme of some of your discussions tomorrow which will revolve around the question of media coverage of elections. Now I happen to know that you set this agenda well before the US Presidential election, so it only remains for me to congratulate you on your prescience.

I must quickly add how glad I am to see so many delegates here from our own region. The question of press freedom in Asia is no less important than it is in the rest of the world, and perhaps more so. The fact that the Freedom Forum chose to establish its Asian presence in Hong Kong in 1994 is an illustration of the key position Hong Kong enjoys as a leading regional centre of press freedom.

I don't see it as my role this evening to address one particular issue or another that might be of topical interest. I shall leave that to the professionals. The assignment I have set for myself is to provide you with a clear view of how we see press freedom in Hong Kong so that it might provide a context for the discussions which follow at your conference tomorrow.

My starting point is that press freedom is but one of the many freedoms we enjoy in Hong Kong. We are a free society based on the rule of law. It is self-evident that we could not enjoy a free press if we did not also enjoy the freedoms of speech, assembly, worship and the myriad other freedoms which are inherent in and fundamental to an open, tolerant, law-abiding, pluralistic society such as we have in Hong Kong. All these freedoms are protected by our English common law system and a determinedly independent judiciary.

Further, these freedoms, this way of life we have developed over generations in Hong Kong, are guaranteed in our constitution, the Basic Law. They are so entrenched because the drafters of our constitution - from both Beijing and Hong Kong - recognised them as being critical to Hong Kong's future success and, indeed, to the success of the whole concept of One Country, Two Systems. We have continued to enjoy these freedoms in Hong Kong since the Handover three and a half years ago.

I have emphasised the self-evident truth on many occasions both before and after the transition that no society anywhere can take its freedoms for granted. The oft-quoted phrase that 'the price of freedom is eternal vigilance' is a truism because ..... well, it is demonstrably true. It is certainly something Hong Kong people have taken to heart. There have been a number of controversies in Hong Kong since the transition which have involved press and other freedoms. The community here has been quick to point out that it wants to see no diminution of them, real or imagined.

I make the last point deliberately. I don't have to tell an audience of journalists and communicators that more than ever perception is reality. We live in a world of nano-second communications where decisions are sometimes taken more quickly than the speed of thought. The consequences of some of these decisions can be painful, and often agonisingly slow.

Those of us who live in free societies must adapt to the breathtaking changes we have seen in the technology that moves information. Indeed we must harness them or be left behind. The IT revolution has had a profound impact on the way news and information is conveyed in newspapers, on television and radio, through mobile phones, faxes and, above all, the Internet. It is hard to see how any man can remain an island in this new millennium environment of information overload.

What does all this mean for press freedom? Surely it means more, rather than less. The sources of news and information, and access to them, will continue to expand, resulting in more choice, increased competition and demands not just for quick information, but for better, more balanced information. The never-ending battle between quantity and quality will inevitably intensify. And those who provide the latter will surely finish stronger than the former.

It is indisputable that the free flow of information has proved itself to be invaluable to Hong Kong. It has helped our government to improve its own performance through constant scrutiny in the public arena. It has contributed to the open and competitive business environment which is essential for a modern international service centre. This is especially so in our case when we aspire to be Asia's World City.

We have wholeheartedly embraced the idea that a knowledge-based economy is the foundation on which we must build our future prosperity. We certainly cannot hope to achieve that without a free press. I also acknowledge that a free press is not always a source of great comfort to people in positions of authority. Before I open my newspapers every morning I remind myself of Nelson Rockefeller's words of wisdom that "Reading about one's failings in the daily newspapers is one of the privileges of high office in a free country."

At the end of the day, of course, that's the thing about a free press. You have to accept it warts and all. You can't have a virtually free press. Or a more or less free press. That's like being a little bit pregnant.

Hong Kong has got where it is today by trying to be the best in all that it does. It certainly strives to achieve the highest standards. That applies - or should apply - as much to our media as it does to anything else. It is certainly a fact of life that the media here comes under the microscope even more than it does in most other places. The very nature of our unique constitutional relationship with the rest of China ensures that. How freely the press operates in Hong Kong is seen as a litmus test for One Country Two Systems. Any perceived slippage is counted as a step down a slippery slope.

So, how has the media fared since 1 July, 1997? From where I sit in the Chief Secretary's office in Lower Albert Road, I can assure you that the Hong Kong media has not lost any of its fabled sting. It continues to rigorously and relentlessly exercise its role as a watchdog on the government and all our doings. I would go further and say that the press is now tougher on the government than it was before the Handover. I believe this reflects the community feeling that now Hong Kong People are Running Hong Kong, our administration is held to higher standards than it was prior to the Handover. I do not complain about that. I am happy to accept the challenge.

It does mean, however, that the government must be always present in the market place of public opinion, battling to make ourselves heard above the din of legislators, lobbyists, lawyers, academics, critics, columnists, commentators, cartoonists, editorial writers, trade unionists, talk show hosts, students, social activists, special interest groups, public relations consultants and spin doctors - to name a few - who dissect our every utterance on public policy. Who says we don't have a free society in Hong Kong? This is the same noisy, argumentative place that it has ever been, and maybe more so.

And this being a major international trading and financial centre, the Hong Kong press devotes a large amount of space to coverage of international news. Our local press is supplemented by titles such as the Asian Wall Street Journal, the International Herald Tribune, the Financial Times, the Nihon Shimbun, Time, Newsweek, the Far Eastern Economic Review and Asiaweek. CNN's Asia headquarters is here. All of this tells you a good deal about Hong Kong's long tradition of press freedom. Long may it continue.

The Hong Kong press also continues to report and comment extensively on Mainland affairs. Since the Handover, they have not shied away from sensitive issues such as Taiwan, Tibet, or the activities of the Falun Gong or Mainland dissidents in both China and elsewhere. Indeed, a number of our Chinese-language newspapers publish articles, columns and commentaries by dissidents such as Wei Jingsheng and Wang Dan.

They do not focus on these aspects to the exclusion of all else. But it forms part of a holistic approach to the extraordinary economic, social and political developments that have taken place on the Mainland over the past 20 years. It is this ready access to the whole range of China-related news that gives Hong Kong the edge over its rivals in dealing with the Mainland market.

Now, if you do not wish to take my word about any of this, I refer you to the view from the United States Policy Act Report released by the State Department in April this year :

QUOTE : Hong Kong has a tradition of free speech and a free press. Political debate remains dynamic and raucous, and a wide range of political opinion and commentary is well represented in the media. Hong Kong people speak freely to the press, and the media freely cover any and all topics that free media cover in other free press jurisdictions around the world. Numerous views and opinions, including those independent or critical of the Hong Kong and PRC governments, were aired in the mass media, in public fora, and by political groups throughout the past year. Hong Kong press coverage of the PRC is extensive and frequently critical. Hong Kong continues to be a hotbed of speculation over changes in leadership and policy in Beijing, and different theories are freely aired in the press. Hong Kong's free media continue to serve as a forum for the views of mainland commentators and dissidents.

Talk radio programmes appear to operate without limitation in criticising local leaders and China's policies toward Hong Kong, political cartoonists continue to satirize, and sometimes savage, prominent political figures in Beijing and Hong Kong in ways unimaginable in the rest of China's media or in the papers of many of Hong Kong's more tightly controlled Asian neighbours. UNQUOTE

This is the way it has always been in Hong Kong, and this is the promise of the high degree of autonomy bestowed on Hong Kong by the Central Government through its promulgation of the Basic Law. It is this promise - and its delivery - that has provided assurance and self-confidence to the people of Hong Kong and, just as importantly, to our large international community and foreign investors. They place their money and trust in Hong Kong because we offer a level playing field protected by basic freedoms and the rule of law.

A free press is very much part of that. If Hong Kong cannot guarantee a free and unfettered flow of news and information, it will unnerve our citizens, undermine the basis of our economy and scare off foreign investors. Any signs of political correctness or self-censorship clogging up that flow are going to send all the wrong signals to the community at home and our friends and business partners abroad.

That is not to say that the press, any more than the rest of us, is perfect or immune from criticism. To paraphrase Nelson Rockefeller, one of the privileges of living in a free society is being able to disagree with what they say about you in the daily newspapers. Curiously enough, governments and the press often find themselves in the same predicament. Government's job is to take decisions affecting the public which, by definition, are bound not to please everybody. The job of newspapers is to report on matters of public interest and often do so in a way that does not please everybody, including the individuals or institutions being reported on.

My own view is that our media can best protect its own interests by aspiring to the highest possible standards. The higher its standards, the greater its standing and impact and influence in the community will be. That's good for the media, and good for the community. But there's no getting away from the fact that the intensity of competition among the Chinese-language press in recent years has led to debilitating price wars and a number of casualties. I hear complaints, too, that it has driven some titles down market and to a general dumbing down in scramble for juicier stories, sharper angles and more sensational headlines.

I realize that the press, TV and radio are big business today and as such, there is fierce competition for circulation and for readers. Hence a tendency to give the public what it wants or what the press believes the public wants. But I feel that given the tremendous freedom that the press enjoys in many parts of the world, and certainly here in Hong Kong, the press should take it upon itself to better inform and illuminate the public. By that I mean a duty to tell the truth, as a journalist sees it, and a commitment to fair play rather than to engage in sensationalism. We have in Hong Kong publishers, editors and journalists who are courageously attempting to give the public a little more of what they should have and a little less of what they want. But we need more of such individuals so that in time we can increase the public's appetite for better and more enlightened information. As the famous American playwright-journalist-diplomat Clare Boothe Luce once said, the press should seek to "educate, inform, engage the interest of, and guide the minds of free men and women." "Freedom" as Clemenceau said, "is nothing in the world but the opportunity for self-discipline". That self-discipline must be voluntarily applied by those in the industry.

The huge turnover in the profession perhaps makes it more difficult to maintain standards and consistency. There is in the local industry itself a solid core of highly-regarded professional journalists and broadcasters who can hold their own with their counterparts in other parts of the world where there is freedom of the press. Our young reporters demonstrate tremendous energy, enthusiasm, persistence and inventiveness in pursuing the daily news leads. Indeed, the Hong Kong press pack is a familiar sight to most of us in public life, although I confess it is not always easy to keep up with the changing faces in this colourful cast of characters. The journalism and communications departments of our universities have produced hundreds of graduates. We have many experienced tutors and professionals dedicated to raising standards and enhancing the status of the profession.

But it is up to the industry itself to ensure a greater and more enduring depth of talent and experience by offering a more rewarding career path, better on-job training and attractive salaries and incentives to stem the flow of young journalists to the greener pastures of public relations and investment banking and, dare I say it, the government's own Information Services Department. In this regard, I would like to commend the Freedom Forum's programmes for journalists in Hong Kong. There have been more than 30 workshops, exhibitions, seminars, conferences, discussions and briefings already this year, including 12 news editing and writing workshops in partnership with the Hong Kong Journalists' Association. These programmes provide valuable insight, training and experience-sharing for local professionals.

Mr Pritchard, I have already taken up a good deal of your time. Your dinner awaits you. I just want to leave you with the assurance that Hong Kong regards press freedom as a bedrock guarantee of our way of life. It is enshrined in our constitution. More importantly, it is embedded in the hearts and minds of our people. We want to see press freedom deepened not diminished. We believe a stronger and even more professional media, free of self-censorship and political correctness, would be beneficial to our society. We welcome the continuing-interest and involvement of the Freedom Forum in Hong Kong. I wish you a productive and stimulating conference tomorrow.

Thank you very much.

End/Thursday, November 16, 2000

NNNN