bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

sponsorType

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

quizIds

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

paywallTypes

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

I was fascinated by the letters from  Anson Chan Fang On-sang and Stephen Lam Sui-lung, secretary for constitutional and mainland affairs ('An open letter to Donald Tsang' and 'Promises have been kept', August 4), on the green paper on constitutional development.

Mr Lam writes in the vein of the 'civil servant' that Mrs Chan once was, and it shows glaringly in his response to her letter.

By that I mean bureauspeak, for example, '60 per cent public support'. Will that be sought through a referendum, or through district councils padded with government appointees?  Mr Lam mentions how it would be difficult to offer three submissions in the green paper  as 'more than 300 submissions'  were received. How on Earth is he going to handle the responses to the wider consultation?

I agree  with Mrs Chan's analysis of the so-called consultation paper.

Hong  Kong people are really far better informed and more democratically able than their current civil servant masters  give them credit for.

Mah Wai-tung, Wan Chai

I am sure most people had high hopes Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's new term of office would lead to better relations with the administration's former opponents.

Mr Tsang has been prompt in getting out the green paper.  I therefore find it worrying that Anson Chan Fang On-sang is already sniping at him ('An open letter to Donald Tsang', August 4).  Of course the press is lapping it up because of her influence as former chief secretary.

The  green paper does look formidable, but it is necessary to remind readers  of the requirements of the Basic Law as the foundation of any reforms.  In the green paper, readers are asked to choose which changes they prefer.

In advising readers which way to vote, political groups are  encouraging any who do not want to read it to take the easy way out and sign an agreement with the party making the proposals.  Any voters who do not want to read the paper for themselves and form their own opinions only prove that they are not yet ready for real democracy.

Elsie Tu, Kwun Tong



Differing views on Anson Chan's stand against green paper