2012, democracy and an impossible situation

In March, when Donald Tsang Yam-kuen stood in the small-circle, chief executive election, he pledged he would find in his second term an ultimate solution to the question of universal suffrage. Then, on July 11, his administration published a green paper on constitutional development, giving the public three months to respond.

The green paper, Mr Tsang promised, would contain three sets of proposals on how to achieve universal suffrage for the chief executive and all members of the Legislative Council. After the consultation, he pledged, he would submit a report to the central government, recommending whichever proposal received 60 per cent public support.

Regrettably, the green paper does not contain the three sets of proposals promised. Instead, it sets out a myriad of options that could be pieced together in many different ways. And there is no reference to sending that report to Beijing.

As for the direct election of the chief executive, the green paper is ominously silent on how candidates can be validly nominated. Speculation has been rife that a mechanism would be devised, using the nomination committee stipulated in Article 45 of the Basic Law, to screen out people unacceptable to Beijing.

Since the green paper contains so many options, chances are no consensus will emerge. Then Mr Tsang can tell Beijing that Hongkongers do not want direct elections in 2012 or even 2017. The problem that has plagued Hong Kong for several decades will be indefinitely postponed.

In spite of the obfuscation, the green paper does say unequivocally that direct elections for the chief executive and all members of the Legco are an option in 2012. Mr Tsang made this point during his election campaign.

In the past few weeks, pro-Beijing politicians and mainland officials have come out in a chorus, saying that direct elections in 2012 would be moving too rapidly, and would be against the 'gradual and orderly' principle laid down in the Basic Law.

Last week, a member of Mr Tsang's Executive Council, Cheng Yiu-tong - head of the pro-Beijing Federation of Trade Unions and a delegate to the National People's Congress - said it was 'impossible' for Hong Kong to achieve universal suffrage in 2012. Beijing, he said, would make its position clear, but he didn't say when or how.

He also launched a vague attack accusing 'somebody' of deceiving the public by claiming that if there were sufficient support, there would be universal suffrage in 2012. He accused that person of having a 'split personality' - for publicly advocating universal suffrage in 2012, while admitting in private that it was impossible.

It is unclear who Mr Cheng is referring to. However, we all know that Mr Tsang put in the green paper that universal suffrage was possible in 2012, and that the public consultation is still continuing.

Is Mr Cheng saying the chief executive made a mistake and that the green paper should be withdrawn? Is he accusing Mr Tsang of having a split personality and deceiving the public? Since Mr Cheng is a member of Exco, we would like to know whether he advised Mr Tsang not to include 2012 in the green paper.

Mr Cheng holds an elevated public position and should not make irresponsible accusations. If he is saying the 2012 option is no longer available, the administration must tell the public whether this is the case.

Since the public consultation is still going on, it is wrong for an Exco member and NPC delegate to rule out an option listed in the green paper.

If Mr Cheng has made a mistake, he must make an apology and take responsibility for his action.

Mr Tsang must recognise that such statements by members of Exco will damage the credibility of the green paper consultation and undermine the integrity of his administration.

Emily Lau Wai-hing is a legislative councillor for The Frontier