More than a third of the motions proposed by pan-democrat lawmakers were rejected compared with one in six moved by the pro-establishment camp or functional constituency members, Legislative Council voting records show.
Also, more than half of the amendments to motions put forward by pan-democrat members in the last legislative session were voted down. By comparison, just a quarter of the amendments moved by their counterparts from the pro-establishment or functional constituency camps were unsuccessful.
Critics say the voting patterns highlight the unfairness of the split voting system in which non-government measures have to gain a simple majority in both the functional constituencies and the geographical constituencies, while government measures need a simple majority of the whole house.
In some cases, motions failed because many members distorted the vote by abstaining.
In one such example on January 14, an amendment by the Democratic Party's Wong Sing-chi to a motion proposing the government formulate a comprehensive policy on the elderly failed because of abstentions, despite receiving strong support from those who voted in both divisions of the house.
The total count was 25-6 (10-6 in the functional constituencies and 15-0 in the geographical). But because eight legislators from the trade-based seats abstained, it did not get a majority of those present and failed. The six abstentions in the directly elected seats did not affect the outcome.
On December 17, a motion by medical lawmaker Leung Ka-lau that the government buy back Link Reit shares was backed 27-17 across the whole house. But it failed on the split vote requirement because 13 of the 22 members present in the functional constituencies voted no. There were no abstentions on that occasion.
