Opinion | Can talks on electoral reform bridge the divide?
Frank Ching says with talks on electoral reform now starting in earnest, all sides willing to engage must nevertheless keep an open mind
The chairman of the National People's Congress Law Committee, Qiao Xiaoyang , ignited a firestorm when he said the Hong Kong chief executive must be patriotic. On the positive side, he sparked discussion on the 2017 election even before a public consultation has begun.
No doubt, there are decision-makers in Beijing who want to screen out candidates they don't like. But, from a tactical standpoint, it makes more sense for Beijing to have as many pro-democracy candidates as possible on the ballot. That way, the pro-democracy vote will be divided, enhancing the chances of pro-establishment candidates. Screen them in, not out.
Actually, anyone who spends some time thinking of the role of the chief executive will conclude that confrontation with Beijing is virtually inconceivable.
The chief executive's job is to govern Hong Kong for the well-being of its people. Today, our well-being cannot be separated from the mainland's development. Whoever is chief executive will want good working relations with local and provincial governments as well as the central government. There is no other way to govern Hong Kong.
Democrats ought to acknowledge that it is not the chief executive's job to change the mainland. "Confronting" Beijing is a theoretical right no chief executive in his right mind would want to exercise. So while it is wrong to insist that candidates should be "patriotic", it is equally wrong to insist that someone who wants to overthrow the mainland government should be on the ballot.
Four months after Qiao's speech, proposals on how the "broadly representative nominating committee" prescribed in the Basic Law should be formed are now the subject of much debate.