• Mon
  • Dec 29, 2014
  • Updated: 12:39am
My Take
PUBLISHED : Friday, 21 March, 2014, 4:40am
UPDATED : Friday, 21 March, 2014, 4:40am

Pan-dems may have to compromise

Revolutions start because rentiers who enjoy long-standing privileges and perks refuse to recognise they are way past their use-by dates.

Let's face it. The functional constituencies exist at the moment not so they can better represent the private sector, offer technical expertise or consult the government. Those rotten boroughs are there so they can guarantee a predictable voting majority for the government, especially when it comes to voting on the government's universal suffrage package for the chief executive election.

In this respect, I agree, for once, with the Alliance for True Democracy that the constituencies need to be phased out. Their idea is to sharply reduce the current 35 functional constituency seats in Legco to 20 by 2016 and then a fully democratic legislature in 2020. You can tweak the numbers but the direction sounds right. It's even possible that the government might agree with this plan in principle because it will not need the constituencies' votes by 2016; their votes are only needed for the current Legco to vote on the CE election package.

There is, however, just one problem. For this plan to succeed fully, you need to pass the CE election reform for 2017. This is because the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress has stipulated that universal suffrage in 2017 is a precondition for a fully elected legislature in or after 2020.

If the pan-democrats fail to obtain public nomination from the government, they would likely in return veto the government's CE reform package. But you may argue they may still achieve - in a separate government reform package for the legislature - the half-measure of significantly reducing the number of functional constituencies in 2016. But it's unlikely those in the FC seats would play ball if there is no progress on the CE election front. After all, you are asking them to voluntarily give up their seats by voting for their destruction.

Everything goes back to the CE election reform. If the pan-dems give up their demand for public nomination but fight for a "broadly representative" if flawed nomination committee, they have a better chance of winning on both the Legco and CE election fronts. Otherwise, they - and Hong Kong - risk being left with little or nothing.


More on this story

For unlimited access to:

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



This article is now closed to comments

‘Those rotten boroughs are there so they can guarantee a predictable voting majority for the government,…’
Not quite so. Nowadays they are there as watchdogs for the conglomerates serving their interests only. For CY Leung and the rest of the society really has no use of the functional constituency with full voting power in the Legislation Council.
Why Hong Kong isn’t moving forward relatively even to itself? Just look at how backward and destructive this self-protective bunch exists in the Legislation.
I'm not convinced the Pan-dems really want full democracy, because they can continue to make money and careers from being the opposition. Their position means there is no need to accept responsibility or come up with meaningful, workable policies. With their fat LEGCO salaries and the status they enjoy, life is pretty good and all you need to do is attack the government. The shallow thinking of the likes of Claudia MO will be exposed for all to see if they ever get real power and need to formulate policies. The safe option is to be the opposition.
If they were here to make money, for sure they would have chosen the DAB. It doesn't pay to be a Democrat in HK these days !
‘Those rotten boroughs are there’
for guild and personal interests and political purposes
Did movie freak Cheung MK
or hollow-shallow NG Maggie
ever contribute any technical expertise?
Because Hong Kong is an executive-led government the pan-democrats emphasis needs to be on ensuring that the chief executive election is real universal suffrage, that is, fair and equal (no exclusion of the nomination and standing for election of candidates on the basis of political affiliation or orientation.) Beijing still has its veto power at the end of the process where it belongs - after the public has spoken - and can simply appoint a chief executive based on consultations following the rejection of a popularly elected but appointed chief executive. While LegCo can be an oppositional and blocking force it cannot lead per se, thus the CE election is key otherwise the whole system is just farce IMO.


SCMP.com Account