Chief government adviser Lau Siu-kai, who is head of the Central Policy Unit, used the term 'critical point' to describe Hong Kong's current situation on the eve of the chief executive's duty visit to Beijing, and then denied having done so. His comment inevitably stirred a political storm.
The effect of using the term is similar to sounding an alarm. I had previously suggested that Lau should resign for causing unnecessary political drama. Now, the Central Policy Unit is caught up in another controversy.
The unit commissioned Chinese University to carry out a public opinion poll on governance, which included asking people whether Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah should resign after the latest budget. Media reports on the poll caused huge embarrassment in government circles, as the poll gave the impression that the administration was laying the groundwork to force Tsang out.
The poll has in fact laid the groundwork for the media to use opinion surveys to try to force officials out of office. Lau should be blamed for having facilitated this objectionable practice.
Lau has made numerous political blunders, though they were not due to his lack of ability.
During the transitional period before 1997, Lau was branded pro-Beijing, giving the impression that he was well-supported politically. After the handover, he was not involved in the Tung Chee-hwa administration, and he became anti-Tung and anti-government. Strangely, soon afterwards, he was recruited to head the Central Policy Unit, and seemingly overnight became a government adviser.
His biggest political miscalculation was badly underestimating public sentiment in relation to the controversial Article 23 proposal for national security legislation. That led to huge embarrassment for Premier Wen Jiabao , who had to face the mass protest attended by 500,000 people on July 1, 2003.