I am so glad that the recommendation I made in this space - proposing competition for competition's sake - worked for Alan Leong Kah-kit and the Civic Party. Now Donald Tsang Yam-kuen will have a running mate for the chief executive election in March. That Mr Leong seems certain to get his 100 nominations to qualify as a contender will come as no surprise to my readers. The real surprise is not that the pro-competition camp won more than 130 seats in the Election Committee: that figure was being mentioned well before the vote. Rather, it's that quite a few young and unknown figures were elected, beating prominent personalities in their respective circles. It seems that a person's achievements, and their social and professional positions, no longer counted in this election. If that was the case, what did count? Or, was this just a chance anomaly that will not repeat itself? These questions will linger in the minds of many people who are going to be involved in various upcoming elections. The rules of elections in Hong Kong seem to have changed drastically since the district council poll of November 2003. A substantial number of young people in their mid-20s appeared out of nowhere - apparently with no political party affiliation - and managed to snatch several seats from party veterans and incumbents in that poll. Then, in the Legislative Council election of September 2004, three barristers with no political experience stole the show, carrying the banner of the new Article 45 Concern Group. The pro-establishment camp showed extraordinary resilience even after the great march of July 1, 2003. Even so, the pro-government Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) and the pro-Beijing Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) both acknowledged that their candidates were getting old and stale. Both the DAB and FTU are planning to promote their second-tier political aspirants. But the Democratic Party, which was the flagship of the pro-democracy camp back in 2003, did not care about the impending succession issue involving its younger members - and did nothing about it. As a result, the internal struggle between those in seats of power - and those who wanted to gain power - has continued until today. Some members left the Democratic Party and formed new groups with other democrats, leading to the creation of the pan-democratic camp. The various political groupings in the pan-democratic camp are now jockeying for dominance: each wants to field more candidates for the district council election next December. This is an important manoeuvre in creating grass-root support for the 2008 Legco election. But, judging from what I see at the moment, the contestants for the district council election do not see much benefit in affiliating themselves with any political group. Instead, from 2003, the word 'democracy' has had an aura, and much was to be gained by calling oneself a democrat. So there will be many 'independent democrats' in the race, with some pan-democratic lawmakers showing their faces from time to time to show support. This is basically a free-for-all, as anybody can call himself or herself an independent democrat and stand for election. We will, therefore, see a lot of new faces. This is the supply side of the game. On the demand side, voters usually do not care much about the political affiliation of candidates in the district council election and, to a lesser extent, in the Legco election. They vote for the person they think they can trust. Years of civic education since the handover have produced an increasing number of young voters who do not attribute much importance to the professional and social standing of candidates. Such voters can identify most easily with young candidates. So we can expect more young candidates to be elected in next year's district council election. With a greatly altered grass-roots political map, the outcome of the 2008 Legco poll cannot help but be affected. More surprises are on the way. Lau Nai-keung is a Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference delegate
