Radical politics will make Hong Kong’s 2016 legislative election the most important in the SAR’s history
Regina Ip says for a city this divided, the upcoming election – which features candidates taking diametrically opposed positions on a range of issues – is likely to shape the future of the city like never before
Young and old, Hong Kong’s would-be politicians come out of the woodwork
An unprecedented number of newcomers from both the pro-establishment and the pan-democratic camps have emerged to challenge the incumbents. The election issues mooted so far – “Hong Kong independence” versus “one country, two systems”, the campaign for Leung Chun-ying’s resignation versus support for his re-election, localism versus nationalism, Hong Kong values versus mainland culture – all point to deep divisions in our society and forces tugging in opposite directions. The campaign slogans unveiled by several political parties show a wish to “take back Hong Kong’s future”. Which side will the people be on – establishment or anti-establishment? That is the question.
The election will test Hong Kong as a nascent democracy
The election will test Hong Kong in a number of ways. It will test the sustainability of Legco as an institution. The filibustering practice first adopted by legislator “mad dog” Wong Yuk-man in 2012 – to obstruct the passage of a bill to prohibit legislators who resigned standing for office again within six months – has spread like wildfire, engulfing the council at all levels. Statutory committees responsible for vetting government funding and staffing requests have had to go into overdrive to clear the backlog of unfinished business. The Legco secretariat has put down a marker for at least eight more hours of work for the Finance Committee in the coming week, the last week before the current term expires.
Taking the cue from Wong, other legislators who objected to any government bill for whatever reason have learned to exploit the loopholes in the existing rules of procedure.
Tiresome theatrics in the Legislative Council is a turn-off for the Hong Kong public
When politics trumps reason: Continual filibustering by Hong Kong’s pan-democrats has gone too far
On July 6, in a solo effort to obstruct the Medical Registration (Amendment) Bill 2016, which will enable disciplinary hearings into alleged malpractice by doctors to be speeded up and remedy the shortfall of doctors at the Hospital Authority, Dr Leung Ka-lau rang the quorum bells about two dozen times and moved a motion to adjourn the debate on the bill. Such filibustering will not only derail the bill, but could also jeopardise two other important bills on the agenda – one to regulate private columbariums and another to improve fire safety by introducing a new class of certified fire engineers.
If Legco is unable to cure itself of such extreme and irresponsible filibustering in the next term, government business will continue to be mired in a senseless and wasteful cycle of bell-ringing and legislative paralysis. Hong Kong as a whole will lose the ability to cure itself of its many social, economic and political woes.
The election will also test Hong Kong as a nascent democracy. Will the public vote for candidates who stand for reason and pragmatism, or candidates who thrive on populist slogans, lies and false information spread through the internet? Can they resist the siren song of crafty politicians who tell them our society can afford to provide a non-contributory retirement scheme for all, or that we can resolve all transport and livelihood problems by buying back the shares of publicly listed companies like the Link Reit and the MTR Corporation?
Populist or liberal: What kind of democracy does Hong Kong really want?
