This article was first published in the South China Morning Post on June 19, 2015. It has been republished online as part of Hong Kong 25 , which looks at how the city has changed since the handover, and what its future holds. By Tony Cheung, Jeffie Lam and Joyce Ng Hong Kong’s legislature yesterday blocked the government’s electoral reform plan as a historic showdown between pan-democrats and Beijing loyalists became a farce when the latter camp’s bungled walkout meant that only eight lawmakers voted for the plan. There was utter confusion among the government’s allies when 31 of them left the chamber in the mistaken belief the ballot would be adjourned while they waited for rural kingpin Lau Wong-fat, who was stuck in traffic on his way to cast his vote. The resulting fiasco ended two years of debate and months of bickering on how Hong Kong could elect its chief executive by “one man, one vote” in 2017. All 27 pan-democratic lawmakers kept their vow to vote no, and pro-establishment medical sector representative Dr Leung Ka-lau added a 28th vote. That would have been enough to deny the proposal the two-thirds majority it needed. But the pro-establishment camp’s plan to blame pan-democrats for the failure of reform was severely undermined, as the walkout left just eight yes votes and a clear majority against the package. The eight who voted yes were the five Liberal Party lawmakers, the Federation of Trade Unions’ Chan Yuen-han, and independents Lam Tai-fai and Chan Kin-por. Legco President Jasper Tsang Yok-sing and labour representative Poon Siu-ping were present but did not vote. Hongkongers watched incredulous as the pan-democrats took the upper hand, and ridiculed the pro-establishment camp for being ignorant of Legco’s rules of procedure. Jeffrey Lam Kin-fung, an Executive Council member and vice-chairman of the Business and Professionals Alliance, bore the brunt of the criticism for asking his colleagues to walk out to wait for Lau. “Let me say sorry,” Lam said, blaming it on what he said was miscommunication. But a frustrated FTU lawmaker, Wong Kwok-kin, described the debacle as a “stupid and careless mistake which certainly would anger Beijing”. Alliance chairman Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen said he went to Beijing’s liaison office yesterday afternoon with several party colleagues to tell “a deputy director” what happened. Meanwhile, according to Liberal Party sources, senior liaison office officials called party leader Vincent Fang Kang at about 1pm yesterday to praise its lawmakers. A mainland official handling Hong Kong affairs said the central government was surprised by the walkout. “What happened eventually was quite embarrassing,” the official said. “On the face of it, the voting results didn’t look so good but all people know well the reasons for the rejection of the reform package.” Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying tried to play down the gaffe, insisting that his allies in Legco had been consistently clear about their support for the reform package. He blamed those who voted no instead: “It means five million eligible voters will be unable to exercise their democratic rights in the next chief executive election.” Leung reiterated that he would now focus on social, economic and livelihood issues over the next two years. A source close to the chief executive said Leung had invited 42 pro-establishment lawmakers to a banquet to thank them for their support, but Leung Ka-lau was left out. Beijing was quick to blame the pan-democrats. A spokesman for the General Office of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee complained that “the minority of Hong Kong lawmakers insisted on confronting the central government”, while a Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office spokesman condemned them for “obstructing democratic development”. The Standing Committee also indicated it would not back down on its reform blueprint. “The decision shall continue to serve as the constitutional ground for Hong Kong in the future as it enforces universal suffrage in the chief executive election, and its legal force is unquestionable,” Xinhua reported, citing a Standing Committee statement. Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, who led the reform push, was grim-faced throughout yesterday’s debate and vote, but took a relatively positive tone after the package was rejected. “We need to be rational, pragmatic and understanding in solving problems, and we need to communicate in different ways,” she said. Civic Party leader Alan Leong Kah-kit declared it “the start of a new wave of democratic movement”. He said: “We will be the gatekeepers in the legislature, not just for a real choice and democracy, but we will also monitor the government on economic and livelihood issues.” Additional reporting by Stuart Lau and Gary Cheung A very long five minutes Pro-Beijing politicians are left ruing their missed opportunity to put down their pan-democrat rivals as they look forward to coming Legco poll By Joyce Ng, Jeffie Lam and Tony Cheung Five minutes. That’s how long it took for the pro-establishment camp’s unity to crumble as its members messed up a Legislative Council walkout and descended into acrimony, pointing fingers at each other and fearing a reprimand from Beijing. Having hoped to exploit a pan-democrat-led no vote for electoral gain, they now fear it is they who will be punished. The final, farcical twist in the 20-month reform saga began to take shape at 12.27pm, when Legco’s bell sounded, alerting lawmakers that they had five minutes to get to the chamber and vote on the government’s package for the 2017 chief executive election. As the bell rang, Jeffrey Lam Kin-fung left the chamber while talking on the phone to his Business and Professionals Alliance colleague Lau Wong-fat. The rural kingpin, whose loyal supporters provide a powerful voting bloc for the pro-establishment camp, was still en route and desperate to vote. Lam then returned in the fourth minute of the five and rose to request a 15-minute suspension for “further discussion”, a plea Legco president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing refused. With less than 30 seconds left, Lam and Ip Kwok-him stood up, with Ip ushering their fellow Beijing loyalists out. Most followed but, crucially, nine stayed behind - enough to ensure the legislature did not fall below its quorum, the minimum number of lawmakers who must be present for a vote. But due to a communication gap, some didn’t join the walkout. Let me say sorry Lawmaker Jeffrey Lam Tsang, who like government officials present seemed caught by surprise, proceeded to the vote after prompting by pan-democrats. Those who left did not realise the vote was about to take place. By the time Tsang announced the result - a crushing 28 votes against to eight in favour - it was too late. There was no going back. So while pan-democrats rejoiced, Lam and the just-arrived Lau had little to say but sorry. “Uncle Fat has been ill but he always wanted to come back and vote,” Lam said. “We wanted to let him fulfil his wish ... But due to a communication gap, some of us didn’t join the walkout. Let me say sorry.” Lau, 79, explained that he had been in Kowloon Tong in the morning, and got caught in traffic on the way to Legco in Admiralty. Asked whether he had considered telling his colleagues to go ahead with the vote - which would have made no difference to the end result, as the proposal would not have achieved the required two-thirds majority - Lau gave a resounding “no”. Asked whether he feared a reprimand from Beijing, he said: “I’ve tried my best and I have no regrets.” Lau’s vote alone may not matter much, but the thousands of villagers he leads are immensely important to the camp. The Heung Yee Kuk - which Lau chaired until handing over to his son recently - is highly efficient in organising villagers to split votes between slates in Legco elections, a crucial skill thanks to the quirks of the city’s proportional representation system. The eight government loyalists who stayed to vote yes - one member of the camp voted no - said they were given no notice of the walkout, or said they were confused. Five of them were members of the business-friendly Liberal Party, whose chairman Felix Chung Kwok-pan said the walkout was “unwise”. The split brings back memories of 2008, when Lam, Lau and others quit the Liberals to form a group which later evolved into the alliance after a major defeat in the Legco election. Those who joined the stunt put aside their differences long enough to sign a statement, which they are running in newspapers today, expressing “deep regret”. But acrimony soon surfaced. Wong Kwok-kin of the Federation of Trade Unions said the “very silly” mistake had “angered” Beijing. He blamed Ip and his Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong colleague Tam Yiu-chung, as well as Jeffrey Lam. “[Ip and Tam] were very reckless. They should have stayed behind to make sure everybody got the message,” Wong said. Wong said the FTU would now have to answer to its supporters for failing to vote, and foresaw problems in November’s district council elections and next year’s Legco poll. That said, at least FTU lawmaker Chan Yuen-han voted yes - she was caught on camera looking aghast as her colleagues left the chamber. New People’s Party chairwoman Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee agreed it was a “blunder” but stressed she was only following the DAB, which she regarded as the camp’s “whip”. Ma Ngok, a political scientist at Chinese University, said the fiasco would anger Beijing and inevitably affect the camp’s electoral prospects. “It has definitely disrupted their game plan as they had hoped to attack pan-democrats for blocking the reform package,” he said. “But how could you run this blame game if you did not even cast your votes?” Additional reporting by Stuart Lau