Ms Eu pointed out that "democracy" was not in itself a "value" or a "right" but was perhaps better understood as a safeguard or protection against autocracy.  She cited the recent examples of Zhao Lianhai and Liu Xiaobo, and the responses to their cases by more liberal opinion on the one hand and more pro-government opinion on the other.  One group saw the judgments in these cases as having to do with denial of conscience and rights; the other as having to do only with the desirable degree of leniency.  The underlying principles involved on the second view included control, harmony and efficiency, whereas the former view related to the rule of law, transparency and equality.  Similarly Hong Kong Government actions following the recent policy address by the Chief Executive of Hong Kong on housing and the wealth gap raised questions of equality of representation and equality before the law; minority interests seemed to have prevailed.

Ms Eu reminded her audience of the old Chinese saying that autocracy can cut people down like grass, and of the tendency of Chinese people to sweep the street just outside their own front door but ignore the wider picture.  In the end the only guarantee of the value of the Hong Kong system lay in people's own preparedness to act, vote, protest etc.

A lively q-and-a followed the talk.  One questioner asked why a democratically elected and popular appointment such as President Obama seemed unable to achieve any significant reforms.  Another noted that Singapore as a principal rival of Hong Kong was more efficient in many ways despite being an autocracy, while a third observed that despite Hong Kong's claims to be more "democratic" than the mainland, the recent case of a village destroyed to make room for a railway suggested otherwise.  A fourth wondered what the process was for seeking a referendum in Hong Kong, and a fifth observed that Hong Kong people were practical and not always willing to act despite their in-principle commitment to "democracy".

Ms Eu answered that democracy necessarily involved tensions and disagreements and so was less "efficient"; that the law allowing referendums was transparent and consultative; and that Hong Kong people's basic humanity would in the end persuade them to act when necessary to safeguard their freedoms, just as their basic civility and decency made such cases as the village at least less aggressive than on the mainland.  Autocracy in the end meant an appeal to efficiency and harmony rather than (as with democracy) humanity, equality, conscience, rule of law, and the right to elect and remove governments.

The Director of the Centre, Professor David Parker, thanked Ms Eu for her insights and her eloquence.  The applause was enthusiastic.