Public support for the city's political groups has taken a dramatic plunge in the past couple of weeks. The blame rests squarely on the unseemly squabbling over political reform and the circus surrounding this month's 'referendum' by-elections, according to pollsters at the University of Hong Kong's public opinion programme.
Let's not listen to claims that this shows Hongkongers' preference for 'harmony' above all else. 'Harmony' - the current political buzz word - is not what we love. Hongkongers want democracy and, in any healthy democracy, dissent is welcomed and necessary. What good is democracy if everyone sees everything the same way, every time?
Hongkongers seem to be tired of the politics of grandstanding that has devoured the political scene. Discussions about constitutional reform have turned into a spectacle of politicians, out for blood, tearing each other down in a futile competition to come up with the best and most insulting sound bite.
The one thing organisers of the so-called de facto referendum have got right is that they did, indeed, win. That is why the Democratic Party should not be blamed for not participating - that is, handing its supporters over to political 'frenemies' on a silver platter. The five re-elected lawmakers added more than 228,000 votes to their support base. League of Social Democrats lawmaker Albert Chan Wai-yip, seen to be the weakest link for the league before the resignations, came out the biggest winner, gaining 77,427 votes and tripling his support. So they have every reason to congratulate themselves for a job well done. But the exercise was completely ineffective in other ways, and done at the expense of Hongkongers' desire to advance democracy through constitutional reform. In short, it was all about them, not us.
Little wonder, then, that when the Democratic Party and the Alliance for Universal Suffrage were invited to chat with Beijing representative Li Gang , others had a serious and contagious case of sour grapes. Now everyone, including those deemed 'pro-establishment', has caught the bug. So when Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen invited Civic Party head Audrey Eu Yuet-mee to a televised debate, all the others - in a furious chorus of 'What about me? Me! Me!' - wanted in on the action. Again, it is all about them and not us.
Tsang's call for the June 17 debate and his choice of Eu as the opponent may have puzzled many. But perhaps the government has learned a thing or two from being sidelined by the recent political stunts. It has watched the political camps slice and dice each other about as much as they can. Now Tsang doesn't seem interested in changing lawmakers' minds: if he were seeking their support, his obvious choice would have been to debate with Democrats leader Albert Ho Chun-yan, because winning might have meant gaining nine votes for the government's constitutional reform package.