Which way now for the political moderates in Hong Kong?

As a political moderate, I backed a very mild proposal put forward by scholars intending to find a way to develop genuine democracy in Hong Kong within the legal framework set by the Basic Law. Nonetheless, Beijing's decision to block even mild electoral reform removed any illusion that China would grant Hongkongers "real" universal suffrage. Even worse, Hong Kong society is being torn apart by the authorities who seek to silence opposition voices.

On the one hand, pro-establishment groups have done their utmost to mobilise their supporters to vilify pro-democratic actions as irrational, violent and disrupting social order. On the other, the Hong Kong government has begun hardening its treatment of those fighting for democracy through "white terror" campaigns.

Years ago, then premier Wen Jiabao warned that Hong Kong's deep-rooted social contradictions could generate various kinds of socio-economic, cultural and political problems. Today, we face many difficulties, including increasing inequality, rising housing prices and rents, limited chances for upward mobility for youngsters, severe elderly poverty, a backlash against mainlanders, and a contentious legislature. Neither former chief executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen nor the current leader, Leung Chun-ying, has been able to satisfactorily resolve these contradictions.

Not only is the legitimacy of the Hong Kong government fast deteriorating, citizens are also becoming increasingly suspicious of the willingness of the Chinese authorities to allow Hong Kong people to rule Hong Kong, given that the chief executives are all "selected" by Beijing. With so many demonstrations and political demands being made on an increasingly regular basis, some mock Hong Kong as a city of endless protest.

People seriously doubt the capability of the administration to govern, never mind bring prosperity and harmony to Hong Kong. If we had genuine democracy and political autonomy, we Hongkongers would be able to bear these consequences, because the chief executive would have been chosen by us.

But we did not choose Leung; lots of people, myself included, are angry with his incompetent yet arrogant leadership. In contrast to Tung Chee-hwa and Donald Tsang, Leung took over when Hong Kong's economic conditions were good. During Tung's and Tsang's terms, the economy was badly hit by the Asian financial crisis, the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak and the global financial crisis. Today, the unemployment rate is a mere 3.3 per cent and the gross domestic product growth rate is around 5.4 per cent.

It is difficult to understand why the support rate for Leung is almost as low as Tung's. According to the University of Hong Kong public opinion programme's most recent survey, Leung's rating stands at just 42 out of 100. The lowest ratings for Tung and Tsang were 36.2 and 39.3 respectively. The conclusion must be that political rather than economic factors have dragged down Leung's support rate.