• Sun
  • Dec 28, 2014
  • Updated: 9:59pm
My Take
PUBLISHED : Monday, 25 March, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Monday, 25 March, 2013, 9:01am

Alliance a recipe for democratic impasse

The pan-democrats put on a show of unity last week by forming the Alliance for True Democracy to fight for "genuine" universal suffrage. But despite all that hand-holding for the photo op, there is no unity in this camp. Just their sheer number - 12 political groups - gives away the charade.

Unity was first scattered in 2010 when the Democrats - wisely - accepted the government's democratic reform package, leading to more than half of the lawmakers now being directly elected. But their decision split the camp, whose breakaway factions have become more extreme and ridiculous by the day, and pulling the once-moderate Civic Party in their direction. After being denounced as traitors, it is doubtful the Democrats would find such moral courage again.

All they can agree on now is to tear to shreds any government democratic reform package, whatever it may contain. The Civic Party and the new alliance have made vague noises about putting forward a consensus plan.

I am not holding my breath.

Any pan-dem group brave or foolhardy enough to put forward feasible direct-election blueprints for the 2017 chief executive race and the 2020 legislature or thereafter is bound to shatter any fiction of unity and divide the camp even further.

So the pan-dems are likely to come up with a plan that is a complete non-starter as far as Beijing and the Hong Kong government are concerned.

Uncompromising groups within the alliance such as People Power have vowed to derail any plan that does not include direct election for the 2016 Legco. Most Hong Kong people realise the 2016 election could be no more than a transition to a fully elected Legco four years later. Why? Because Beijing says so. But instead of focusing on devising a feasible transitional voting system that would achieve full voting in 2020, some radicals are using the 2016 poll as an excuse for a veto.

Who knows what other absurd veto conditions the League of Social Democrats and Neo Democrats have up their sleeves?

In sum, the pan-dems can maintain unity only by letting the fringe groups take over. Our democratic agenda is being hijacked by people who, in the name of democracy, are making it even more difficult for Hong Kong to achieve it.


For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

Some Pan-dems, or should I say, some self-righteous people are doing their own things according to their own judgment or own preference. I can't imagine the likes of "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung, Albert Chan Wai-yip and Wong Yuk-man running Hong Kong, and I hope I am not incorrect to say, they are not even doing the right thing in the roles they are supposed to represent now. As a Hongkonger, I like to request their exist, and let more constructive peope to run the Democratic party, to improve their standing, to show that they work for the benefit of the majority Hongkongers who want a decent life - better housing, better health care, better education system, better retirement benefts, better daily life, better income to sustain a decent living standards....
John Adams
Alex you are 100% correct.
The extremists on the pro-dem side probably only speak for the radical 1-2% of HK's electorate.
I certainly don't want a democratic election system, whether for LEGCO or CE, that is devised by these nutters, let alone ever to have of them as CE .
hard times !
Big mouth barking like a mad dog ----you mean Maddog Wong Yuk-man whose knowledge of Chinese history might be the best among the 70 lawmakers, not to say his expertise in journalism which he taught at Chu Hoi College for many years.His nickname: Maddog was bestowed to him himself signifying his outspokenness at injustice in the society or on Mainland China.Professor Wong may be a bettter address of him.PamD should be written : Pan-democrats or Pan-demo.Please check your words used before posting !
PamD needs a leader like Aung San Suukyi who is intelligent, good negotiating and compromising skills, charismatic , focus ( not like PamD fighting for everything in the sky) and strong but not with a big mouth baking like a mad dog. My 2 cents.
I wonder if Mr. Lo could explain his comment "the Democrats - wisely - accepted the government's democratic reform package. When accepting this package cost them seats in the last Legislative Counsel election. The reason that it cost them votes and ultimately seats is because they voted in favor of something that their constituents didn't want or like.
If you want to see how totally ridiculous what you are saying sounds just look at the number of votes cast for those who truly support universal suffrage and for those who don't. Those who are in Legco to fill a seat, attend functions where they can kowtow to Beijing, sit quietly in Legco until it is time to vote and collect their pay will go the way of Lau Kong Wah when Legco is elected in 2020. But hopefully unlike Lau, they won't be able to sneak in the back door later.
hard times !
Defintely, this 'Bye-bye' is himself/herself the most self-righteous guy in town who writes accroding to his own judgement, his own preference and his ...Why can't so-called radical lawmakers like Mr.Wong Yuk-man (much learned than this 'Bye-bye' and not less than this Alex Lo who is assumed to be a pro-government,pro-Being anti-democracy element by many in town) , Chan Wai-yip or Long-hair, Leung Kwok-hung be elected as our chief executive if they are voted in by the majority of qualified voters here ? I wonder. According to the standard of the United Nations, a geniune universal suffrage should be carried out by 'one man,one vote' ---direct election and no any so-called a screening scheme or a bottom line set ! Right ?
Without a doubt you're a big time self-righteous guy. These radical lawmakers were elected by a minority of people. They do not represent the view of all of Hong Kong. Do we really want political reform held up by these clowns?

The USA also has screening mechanisms in place. It is a two party system after all. There are both legislative and financial restrictions in place to ensure that only a Republican or Democrat political candidate becomes US president. Historically these restrictions have been proven to be effective.

Every US president so far has been pretty moderate and panders to corporations who finance their political campaigns rather than to the voters themselves! Obama in his first election promised to kick out lobbyists (Worse than FCs!) from his administration. What did he do as soon as he was elected? Appointed a bunch of lobbyists!! The best part is that once Obama's first term was up, everyone forgot about Obama's broken promises and re-elected him again. I don't really blame the voters because Mitt Romney wasn't much of an alternative. Welcome to Democracy!

The US screening mechanism against third parties is so effective that even both houses of the legislature are compromised of mostly Democrats and Republicans. There are only 1 or 2 independent lawmakers! Oh yeah and most US law is written by corporations and passed on to the lawmaker.

Hong Kong's democratic elections in 2017 will meet the US standard of democracy without a doubt.


SCMP.com Account