welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. when chinese sovereignty was restored in hong kong, beijing's communist rulers saw the logic of maintaining the one country, two systems principle. so, how come some 26 years later, hong kong's autonomy looks more like a convenient fiction than a fact? my guest is regina ip, convenor of hong kong's executive council and leader of the new people's party. what does hong kong's fate tell us about beijing's worldview?

regina ip in hong kong, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. good to talk to you. let me ask you a very simple first question. 0k. since 2020, hong kong has been living with a very draconian national security law that was imposed from beijing. now, it seems that the hong kong government is determined to legislate an even tougher national security law during 202a. why? well, our national security law, mandated by beijing, is not draconian at all. it is far less comprehensive

and sweeping than the national security act that your parliament enacted last july, you know? you created a lot more new offences. our national security law enacted by beijing is nothing compared to what you have. what you have is far more stringent, comprehensive and draconian. well, i think a lot of it depends on the implementation, doesn't it? and when your territory uses the laws that you have through the national security legislation to lock up opposition politicians, pro—democracy activists, to eliminate independent voices in the media and ensure that people can no longer take to the streets to protest, that looks draconian. we have not locked up any people because just because they advocate democracy. we have only locked up people —

we have only arrested and charged people involved in serious national security offences — the sort of offences that won't be tolerated in any country. and so far, no more than 205 companies have been charged under our national security laws. well, as i as i understand it — and these statistics come from your hong kong government — 280 people have been charged and 30 have been convicted under the chinese—imposed national security law as it stands. but chief executivejohn lee — who, of course, in the end is the de facto ruler of hong kong — he says that he needs to go further. he says that we must act against acts of, quote, "soft resistance". what on earth does he mean by "soft resistance"? it's not for me to define what our chief executive has said, you know?

but i can tell you the national security law enacted by the national people's congress standing committee only filled two gaps in our law in creating the offence of secession and subversion. and we have a constitutional duty under article 23 of the basic law to prohibit seven national security offences, and that duty has been outstanding for 26 years, so we plan to do that. the chief executive has said that we should complete that duty by the end of this year. you're a long—time member of the legislative council. you've had a long career in politics. you sponsored a security law back in 2003. you tried to push it through the legislative council. that led to hundreds of thousands of hongkongers taking to the streets to protest and complain about it. and eventually, the plan, 20 years ago, was shelved.

do you not accept that if the people of hong kong were allowed to go back on the streets and protest today, they almost certainly would be saying the same thing about your proposals today? well, when the violent protests, anti—china — violent anti—china protests — broke out in 2019, a lot of people said to me they should have supported enacting the bill that i championed back in 2023 because i would have created the offence of secession and subversion and gave the government the legislative tools to deal with those violent protesters. but with respect... the version i championed — the version i championed... when people — when people take to the streets to demand democracy in hong kong, they are not demanding secession. they are not demanding that hong kong become an independent nation state. they are simply saying that under the principle

that was established in 1997 of one country, two systems, with genuine political autonomy for hong kong, there must be greater democratisation. that is what they want. the trouble is that people like you now call them secessionists. well, first of all, there is no promise of democracy in the sino—british joint declaration. secondly, in the basic law, beijing only agreed to constitutional reform at a measured pace, in a slow and in a gradual manner and in accordance with the actual situation. and the demands from the protesters in 2019 were not simple democracy. they were asking things that would not be achievable and would not be accepted by any government, like amnesty — granting an amnesty to all those

who broke the law. and some of them did call for hong kong independence and they did try to topple the hong kong government. many of them were actually asking for regime change. the fact is hong kong has changed a lot in the last few years, hasn't it? listen to the words of michael fisher — he's a chinese university of hong kong law professor who actually left hong kong just a few months ago. he said, "things that five years ago we took for granted — "freedom of expression, freedom to demonstrate — "these have all been effectively eroded "or destroyed." well, hong kong has to change to keep up with the times. some people complain that we should have changed earlier to identify ourselves more with our motherland. 0ur media continue to be very active and there are different voices in our society, and i don't agree with mr fisher that the freedom of expression or the freedom of demonstration have been eroded at all.

interesting, that phrase of yours — "we want to be more "like the motherland." of course, you mean china. in china... yes, because china is our motherland. ..in china, there are political prisoners, there's no freedom of expression. for most people who are dissenting from the government and the communist party line, they run a risk of imprisonment and sometimes abuse within prison. is that the kind of motherland you want to emulate? i really take exception to your sweeping — highly sweeping and negative description of my motherland, you know? and, you know, the bloggers in the mainland are very active. there are diverse voices in the mainland. the creative industries are thriving. the markets are doing well. you have painted a totally untrue picture of my motherland, and i protest against that. let's talk about individual cases. nathan law was on this hardtalk programme just

a few months ago. he's in exile now. of course, he was one of the main high—profile young leaders of the pro—democracy movement. he and, indeed, ithink at the moment seven other pro—democracy activists now have a bounty on their heads of somei million hkd, even though they no longer live in the territory. i think mr lee called them "street rats" whom he wants to see brought back to face justice. that kind of dehumanising language of pro—democracy activists — are you, as a long—time politician, happy to echo that? i think mr lee was simply trying to stress to hong kong people that we should not — we should dissociate ourselves from these fugitives as much as possible. what the hong kong police... do you see — do you see — i'm just interested — do you see pro—democracy activists, those who dissent from the current policies

of the hong kong government, as street rats? they are not simple pro—democracy activists. they are people who have been involved in serious national security crimes and wanted by our law enforcement agency. i see nothing wrong with putting up a warrant for them, even though they are out of hong kong. nowadays, it's not easy to run for office in hong kong, to get into the legislative council. of the 90 seats, only 20 are open to wide constituency election. the other 70 are much more limited in terms of who can actually get into the legco, and it's quite clear that opposition parties are no longer welcome. there is a patriot test for anybody who wants to run and, clearly, those who dissent are not regarded as patriots. one of the leading opposition parties, the civic party, has basically had

to disband itself. i'm just constantly coming back to this point that you yourself, over years, have taken part in the legislative council elections, you've been a politician. is there no part of you that worries about this, essentially, the elimination of opposition voices in hong kong? 0ur legislature is, by any measure, far more liberal than what we had before 1997, when all members were either appointed by the governor or they were officials themselves, you know? the individuals you mentioned and the political groupings, they have to be excluded from our legislature because they have caused widespread havoc in our legislature, caused a lot of disorder,

dysfunction and, more seriously, they have tried to use the legislature as — against — to turn our legislature against our country, you know? and nathan law, people like nathan law, they were famous for not doing their oath of allegiance properly. i mean, your country, your parliament require people to take oaths of allegiance. if people would not take oaths of allegiance, would not take them seriously, they would not be admitted to your parliament, right? we have the same rules as all other legislators. you have the same rules — you clearly don't have the same rules as many nations which, for example, tolerate, allow, indeed even encourage a free press. let's just talk briefly about the case ofjimmy lai, owner of the apple daily tabloid. jimmy lai, i believe, is now in his mid 70s. he's been imprisoned for more than three years,

charged with, quote, "collusion with foreign forces, "conspiracy to collude with foreign forces". his crime, was it not, was running a media outlet that wouldn't toe the party line and having a media profile which allowed him to meet prominent politicians from europe and the united states, which the chinese communist party simply couldn't stomach? you don't seem to have been following the evidence which has been coming before the courts in the past few days. the apple daily, the next media group, is only a front for mr lai to mobilise opposition to china — in fact, to launder money, through his american friends, to undertake political work to topple the government and to lobby for sanctions against china. these are very serious national security offences. well... under your new national

security law, he would be regarded as someone involved in a hostile state threat. he's currently on trial and, of course, he denies all those charges. he would deny everything you have just put to me. but more than that, his own legal team have pointed out that one of the key witnesses for the prosecution, a gentleman by the name of andy li, is a man who himself was arrested inside china, the legal team claims he was abused and tortured inside china and, as i understand it, he is now in a state psychiatric facility in hong kong. can the prosecution really put forward a person like that as a credible witness againstjimmy lai? what you said is totally baseless. andy li actually tried to enter china illegally, without permission, and was caught by the chinese law enforcement. a top aide of mr lai, mrcheung kim—hung,

has admitted in court that mr lai instructed him to use apple daily and the next media group to incite people to take to the streets to undertake violent protests and to lobby for sanctions against china and the hong kong government. this has come out in court evidence. you seem to have been... you seem to be totally unaware of the facts or deliberately try to skew the actual situation. i don't think i'm unaware of the facts, i'm simply very aware of the way in which thejimmy lai trial is being seen in many parts of the world far from hong kong and far from beijing. as sebastian lai, the son ofjimmy lai, says, "they are basically" — he says of the hong kong government — "punishing a publisher, a 75—year—old man, "for standing up for the freedoms of hong kong that "were promised during the handover." that's the way that many in the outside world see this, including in the united states,

where the lai case is so high profile, it's moved a whole bunch of us lawmakers to push for another round of sanctions imposed directly on hong kong. what you describe is totally divorced from the actual situation. all the evidence coming before the court in the past few days shows that mr lai has instructed his top aides... well, you've made that point, if i may say... ..who had turned government evidence... you've made that point and we will see how the court proceeds in the next few weeks and months. but i come back to this point now about isolation — are you not worried that in many parts of the world this is seen as a part of a chinese move to impose its total control on your territory? we have a duty to protect the safety of our country, to protect the security of our country and the safety of our people. were it not for the national security law enacted in 2020, hong kong might still

be engulfed in chaos and serious political violence. so, we are very upset by the biased reporting on the part of western media and what you describe is totally unfair to hong kong. when the national security legislation was put on the table, not least by yourself as security minister, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of hongkongers made plain their deep disquiet. now, they're not able to do that. but what we have seen in recent months and years is many hongkongers voting with their feet and choosing to leave the territory if they can get a visa to go to somewhere else. i'm looking at the numbers who've gone to taiwan — more than 37,000 have secured temporary residency, nearly 6,000,

permanent residency. 160,000 have taken advantage of an offer from the uk to ease visa rules for those coming from hong kong. the truth is, many hongkongers — particularly the better off, the very well—educated, those who are able to travel — want to get out as they see china suffocating your territory. talking about the emigration to britain, your government has actually breached its undertaking in the memorandum on nationality signed during the sino—british negotiations not to offer a route to right of abode to hongkongers who are chinese nationals. but address my point, which is to ask you why so many hongkongers want to leave? there has always been outflows of hong kong people, ways of emigration and return to hong kong in the past decades. there have been even higher waves of emigration in the �*60s, in the �*70s, in the �*80s. what's happened now is many countries have lowered their thresholds to grab our doctors, our nurses,

our professionals, including the uk. and then, i know many who have gone to taiwan are regretting because the taiwan authorities are discriminating against them and not trusting them. the problem is that in the past, hong kong was a major international hub. it attracted huge investment from international business. it was a financial centre, a legal centre, and it had a cachet notjust in asia but right around the world. if you look at the statistics today, you are clearly losing that element of being a regional magnet, a regional hub. as eswar prasad, an economist and professor of trade policy at cornell university in the us, says, "hong kong "is now facing an existential crisis as a major "international financial centre."

that comment is totally overstated and unfair and if we have any problem with outflow of capital, that's partly because of the lobbying mr lai and his gang has done to countries like the us to stop the inflow of capital to hong kong. a lot of us federal pension funds have made decisions, have ordered their fund managers not to invest in hong kong. and that's. .. ..largely, that has a lot to do with lobbying by people, by mr lai, that's why he's charged with the offence of... you're haemorrhaging — you're haemorrhaging firms, businesses with regional headquarters in asia because they're moving out of hong kong — many of them to singapore. 0ne high—profile example which is nothing to do with the united states, the national australia bank has announced that it is shutting its hong kong office. this is the reality you face. your political environment

is costing you, big time. some people emigrated to singapore. some regional staff has gone in the past few years, partly because of our covid—related restrictions. hong kong is used to people coming and going. they are free to move as part of our freedoms guaranteed by the basic law. but we have new people coming, new funds coming. our family offices are doing well. we are attracting capital from south—east asia, from saudi arabia, and hong kong continues to be a capitalfor the contemporary art auction. we continue to do very well in conventions and exhibitions. yeah, yoursunny optimism... so, it's coming back. if i may say so, your sunny optimism matches that ofjohn lee, the chief executive, who says, you know, "hong kong still means prosperity. "we are still the world's pre—eminent gateway." the truth, if you look at the data, is that more and more, you are reliant on chinese incomers.

0ne international financial centre, one of the biggest office blocks in hong kong, has seen the office space that is occupied by chinese tenants double in the last couple of years. china's moving in, the international community's moving out, and that will change the character of hong kong forever. stephen, you are somewhat out of touch. of the 2,600 companies listed on our stock exchange, it's been well known for a long time that 70% are chinese enterprises, state—owned enterprises or private enterprises. china has always been a key factor driving our prosperity, whether before or after 1997. we used to be the sole intermediary handling their businesses. of course, we are facing more competition from other chinese cities and from our neighbours, like singapore, who also wants the china business. so, we are used to that competition and we are not

worried about one australian company moving out of hong kong. we're attracting new ones. well, it's an interesting point. it's an interesting point you make about your relationship with china — the motherland, as you put it. isn't the truth that, right now in 2024, china cares less about maintaining hong kong's international standing? it cares much more about ensuring hong kong's stability and obedience. and that means, that means hong kong is going to continue to see itself more and more controlled from beijing. totally untrue. when president xijinping visited hong kong injuly 2022, he stressed our key advantage is our law, the common law system, and our international linkages, and encouraged us to continue to expand our international space and be a platform for international engagement and interaction. he actually referred to the common law system twice in his keynote speech.

so, what you said is totally untrue. well, we could continue the conversation but, sadly, we're out of time. regina ip, i do thank you very much indeed forjoining me on hardtalk. it's a pleasure. hello. storm jocelyn is the latest named storm to come our way, through tuesday and into tuesday night. the storm system has been fired up by the same process which we saw with storm isha. cold arctic air recently across the eastern portion of the united states and in canada, big temperature contrast down towards florida,

and that has really fired up an active and potent jet stream. and it's jet streams which have developed this low pressure system. this is jocelyn, not as potent as isha, but will still cross the country and have impacts. now, storm jocelyn is almost like a two stage storm. the winds will strengthen throughout tuesday, but by day it's the heavy rain which could have its greatest impact across parts of scotland, north—west england, north—west wales. and then into the night the winds start to peak with the worst of them across the northern half of the uk. by contrast, out there to start the day on tuesday, fairly quiet start. earlier frost will have gone across eastern areas as temperatures rise, clear and bright here to begin with with some high cloud around, but in the west already mild, windy and wet. some heavy rain at times in northern ireland throughout much of the day, clearing into the late afternoon. some of the heaviest, most persistent rain, though, setting up across the hills of southwest scotland, also into parts of cumbria, yorkshire, dales and north—west wales. it's here where there's a real risk of flooding. rain will have pushed across all parts, turning a bit drizzlier, that rain across the south

later and lots of low cloud. very mild but very windy to end the day. and it's into the night where winds will strengthen further. met office amber warning across the north and west scotland. we're expecting some of the greatest impacts and gusts of wind in excess of 80mph. so let me take you through tuesday night. there's jocelyn passing to the north. the isobars really packing in once the worst of the heavy rain's out the way and the winds strengthen right the way through into the start of wednesday morning rush hour, particularly in scotland. those winds will gradually ease there and impacts could still be ongoing, but wednesday, it's almost a repeat of what we saw on monday — a lot more in the way of dry and sunny weather around, a few showers in the north, and then clouding over across the south with some drizzle in cornwall later in the day. overall, a fresher day than tuesday. a fresher night, then with a touch of frost in the north—east of the country as we go through into thursday. these next weather fronts that are pushing not quite as potent as we've seen so far this week. it will bring lots of cloud across the country. damp and drizzly, around some western coast and some of the heavier bursts of rain at times in the west,

but a bit more erratic and not as windy as it will be during the next 36 hours. take care.

live from london, this is bbc news. the us and uk carry out another wave of strikes against houthi rebels in yemen,

for the second time in 11 days. israel's offensive in southern gaza has intensified, as an unconfirmed report suggests a pause in the fighting might be on the table. and donald trump and nikki haley are making their final push for votes, ahead of the republican presidential primary in new hampshire. hello, i'm sally bundock. a warm welcome. the us and uk have again hit houthi targets in yemen, in response to attacks by the group in the red sea. the action also received support from australia, bahrain, canada and the netherlands. the six countries have released a joint statement saying: "these precision strikes are intended to disrupt "and degrade the capabilities that the houthis use "to threaten global trade "and the lives of

innocent mariners."