The two edges of public opinion
The constitutional reform fiasco of 2005 may have lapsed into history. But Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen is still bitter that the pro-democratic legislators vetoed the reform package. Speaking in an interview with Time magazine last month, he said: 'I did not succeed, not because people didn't want it. People want it: there was majority support for it. But there were some bloody-minded politicians who wouldn't allow it through in the Legislative Council - against the people's wishes.'
Mr Tsang was telling the truth, but only half of it. True, the so-called 'district council model' that he proposed received the support of the majority in opinion polls. But it is also true that the proposals fell short of public expectations, as shown in polls, to attain universal suffrage as soon as possible.
The all-lose political reform exercise in 2005 was a lesson in the complexities and political sensitivities of handling public opinion on such contentious issues as universal suffrage. By selectively using opinion poll results on controversial policies to serve its political agenda, the government risks widening the political divide even further.
Worse, the government undermines its own credibility and trustworthiness.
There are plenty of cases. Former chief secretary Anson Chan Fang On-sang cites the controversy over the government's consultation exercise, in 1987, over direct elections to the Legislative Council. A clear majority of people favoured the introduction of a popular vote for Legco members in 1988, but the government ruled out the idea, saying society was divided on the issue.
Twenty years on, the British government's decision then to delay direct polls - in order to secure Beijing's blessing for its democratisation plan before the handover - remains part of the frustrating memory many Hongkongers have of colonial rule.
Against that background, the question of how to collect and assess public opinion in the upcoming government consultation over universal suffrage is bound to become controversial.
Mr Tsang recently set the benchmark at 60 per cent of public support for the government's proposal on universal suffrage. He did not specify whether that would be based on surveys conducted by the government or by other, independent pollsters. Nor did he say whether an opinion poll would be the sole consideration in the government's decision on universal suffrage.
It is not difficult to understand the government's concern - both before and after 1997 - to secure the support of a majority of Hongkongers for its policies, expressed in opinion polls.
Mr Tsang lacks a popular electoral mandate and faces a rising tide of political activism. It's no wonder that he has underscored the importance of anchoring his policies in public opinion.
It is an open secret that the government's Central Policy Unit has run a comprehensive opinion survey programme that covers a wide range of short- and long-term political and policy issues.
The community has become increasingly complex and its interests more diverse - at times conflicting. So it is vitally important for the government to have a full grasp of the spectrum of public opinion.
In view of its lack of votes in the Legislative Council, the administration is understandably keen to ensure that is on the side of the majority of people on contentious issues. That is hardly wrong, in principle.
But, as the 1987 political reform farce showed, there is a danger that the government may be tempted to try to justify its decisions by playing with different numbers in opinion polls.
Mr Tsang has pledged to deliver an 'ultimate solution' to the issue of universal suffrage in the next five years. For it to become a once-and-for-all solution, it has to be based on a fair and honest collation and assessment of public opinion.
Chris Yeung is the Post's editor-at-large
