'Why did they bother to consult with the public?' Reaction on the streets to reform reports
What did the public make of today's reports on political reform?
On Tuesday the government unveiled two key reports on political reforms necessary to introduce universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017.
Both reports concluded that "mainstream opinion" in Hong Kong was that candidates for the top job should be picked by a committee, and that the city's next leader should "love the country and love Hong Kong".
The chief executive's report, which will be delivered to Beijing, failed to directly mention the almost 800,000 people who called for public nomination in an unofficial referendum, or the 510,000 people that organisers say took part in the July 1 march in support of genuine democracy.
Post reporters took to the streets to hear what the public made of today's reports.
Carrie Lam should have elaborated more on alternative views, such as public nomination of candidates, expressed by local residents, instead of focusing just on the importance of the nominating committee and views of the government. The government cannot just force people to comply with what they deem is the right method [of nominating chief executive candidates]. The report should have given an equal amount of space to different views on political reform to enable sound discussion with Beijing to take place.
I believe in the requirement for chief executive candidates to love Hong Kong but not necessarily [to love] China, since they have differences. I would advocate democracy in that everyone should have a vote and a say. It is practical to an extent, though I'm not saying that it will work. I am not sure if everyone fully understands and can think for themselves.
I don't quite understand today's government. There is a huge gap between rich and poor and we should solve this first. I didn't go to the July 1 march and I'm not planning to go to Occupy Central.
I support the Occupy Central movement, but this will largely depend on the severity of the political situation and the government's attitude. We students took part in the July 1 rally and will continue to do so.
The report seems to be just a rehash of previous statements stressing the importance of the nominating committee. Both Carrie Lam and Leung Chun-ying should relay in full terms views, such as on public nomination, expressed by residents through protests and other means in recent months. There is no need [for them] to hide or refrain from mentioning at reasonable length what has been happening in our society.
There is no civic nomination so it does not take the popular vote into consideration and the central government is unlikely to budge.
She [Carrie Lam] should have elaborated on what the mainstream views are on patriotism being a criterion for the nomination of chief executive candidates, and that the chief executive has the responsibility of protecting the interests of Hong Kong people against any policies proposed by the central government that are not conducive to our society.
I am not aware of the report, but I think Hong Kong people should have political representation. [I am] not going to take part in Occupy Central.
I am not sure what the political reform is about. I support the Occupy Central actions but I won't take part because I am too busy. However I went to the July 1 March.
