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

paywallTypes

corrections

sponsorType

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

Tony Cheung

Lai Ying-kit

Pan-democrat lawmakers accused the government of “failing to heed public opinion” as the momentous Legislative Council debate on the controversial blueprint for the 2017 chief executive election resumed this morning.
Since yesterday, pan-democrat lawmakers have stuck to their guns during the debate; making it all but certain they would block the package in a vote that could be held as early as today.
A total of 25 lawmakers spoke yesterday, including nine from the pro-establishment camp and 16 from the pan-democratic camp.
Each lawmaker is allowed to speak for 15 minutes, meaning that the vote could take place tomorrow if all 44 remaining lawmakers give a speech.
But it was reported that some pro-establishment lawmakers and officials hoped that the vote could take place at around 5pm today.

Charles Mok, professional commons:
“Recently, some people said there is no such thing as genuine or fake universal suffrage, so is there genuine or fake milk powder, or bank notes too? By saying that there is ‘no genuine or fake’, you are in fact admitting that it is fake [democracy].
"If we implemented universal suffrage according to Beijing’s [August 31] decision … it’s possible that nominating committees can also be set up in every functional constituency, it will be even worse than [what we have now].”

Elizabeth Quat, Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong:
"I once asked a group of students, if you were a national leader, would you let a [confrontational] person take up the top job, would it affect national security? And they answered ‘Of course it would!’
"Even students understand this, but the pan-democrats insist that [national security] is irrelevant … If they are not ignorant, they must be pretending to be so with the intention to mislead the public."

Chan Kin-por, insurance sector:
"The pan-democrats have to bear all the responsibility for the rejection of the proposal. The pan-democrats’ thinking that they can get a better proposal in future is only wishful thinking. Their action will mean Hongkongers have to wait another 10 years. At the time Hongkongers will have no bargaining power."

Tony Tse Wai-chuen, architectural, surveying and planning sector:
"Back in colonial Hong Kong in the 1960s, not only were the governors appointed by the British government, all civil servants, judiciary personnel, Executive Council members and legislators were appointed by the governor. Direct elections for the legislature only started in 1991.
"Constitutional development does not happen in one day in any country. It takes a long time to evolve. The election methods for the chief executive need to be in a gradual and orderly manner and be implemented according to the actual situation. This will avoid undermining Hongkongers’ interests because it moves too fast."

Raymond Chan Chi-chuen, People Power:
“Pro-establishment lawmakers said that our call for “genuine universal suffrage” lacked theoretical foundation … Yet one of our foundations was an editorial in Xinhua Daily in 1944, even the Communist Party recognised there is a ‘genuine universal suffrage system’ before it became the ruling party.
"Do you know why so many people confronted you [officials] when you visited different districts, because this is merely a scam … and the people had to be courageous in doing what is right in public."

Christopher Cheung Wah-fung, financial services sector
"Democracy development in Hong Kong must be done in a gradual manner. As the late Democratic Party veteran Szeto Wah said: 'Rice has to be eaten bite by bite.' Pan-democrats' demand for reaching the goal in one step is unrealistic."

Wong Yuk-man, pan-democrat independent:
“An earlier television commercial by the government said ‘voters were onlookers in past chief executive elections, but if the reform package is approved, five million Hongkongers can have a say, and this opportunity should not be missed.’ This is blatantly confusing right and wrong, and misleading residents.
"Recently, people are starting to notice that some students activists and pan-democrats are trying to move towards [localism] and ‘rewriting the constitution by the people’.
"This amending of the Basic Law could not be achieved through the [mechanism stipulated in the mini-constitution itself] … it must be done through bottom-up and persistent struggle, and force the Communist Party to accept ‘a rewritten constitution by the people’ and self-determination by referendum."

Dr Priscilla Leung Mei-fun, Business and Professionals Alliance:
“The pan-democrats’ strategy was wrong from the beginning … This morning, [the Democratic Party’s] Albert Ho Chun-yan is still saying that ‘voting down this reform package is tantamount to voting down [Beijing’s August 31] decision’.
“I hope pan-democrats can change their mind, and would not give up the chance to be the kingmakers in the 2017 chief executive election … But if the package is voted down, I hope Hong Kong will have the opportunity to take a break, and pan-democrats would give up on radicalism and say no to it.”

Helena Wong Pik-wan, Democratic Party:
"I started fighting for democracy when I was 20-something, the same age as the students taking part in the Umbrella movement, Up to this moment, I need to cast a 'no' vote in tears.
"Why? Very simple. This [universal suffrage] is fake.
"I hope Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, who has been visiting different districts recently, can go down [outside Legco] to listen to public views. Not only to those of the 'red' camps in support of the reform proposal, but you should also listen to those who are fighting the sweltering sun to watch the live broadcast of our debate."

Lam Tai-fai, industry sector:
"I am completely disappointed by the pan-democrats. I suggest the government save their words. There is no need for the chief secretary to feel unhappy or for her to continue efforts to persuade them to change their mind. They have treaded too far afield on the wrong path. They are now on the verge of a cliff and have no way back. They cannot judge what is right and wrong. They are pitiful.
"President, the Civic Party's Alan Leong Kah-kit can cheat all 26 [other] pan-democrats into tying themselves together. It can be said he has excellent cheating techniques. Regrettably, this scam and hostage taking has led to the miscarriage of the reform proposal. It has sent Hong Kong's democratic progress into a depression, a backtrack. This is very disheartening."


Why the worst may be over for Hong Kong

Is Hong Kong’s revamped district council system working well?

Xi puts faith in Lee to deliver on Hong Kong economic development, reform

New code of conduct offers clarity on Hong Kong civil servants’ behaviour

Hong Kong political reform

Pan-democrats accuse Hong Kong government of failing to listen to public in reform debate