Only way to save constitutional reform

THE government is to put its package ofproposals for the methods of selecting theChief Executive (CE) and forming theLegislative Council (Legco) in 2012 to the vote inLegco next Wednesday. Much negotiation has takenplace since more than six months ago. As mattersstand, the constitutional reform is in a critical stage.

The only thing that can save it now is the "amendedDistrict Council (DC) plan" the Democratic Party andthe Alliance for Universal Suffrage have put forward. Inour view, the central government and theestablishmentarians should, having regard to HongKong's overall interests, give the green light to it. Bydoing so, they can allow Hong Kong's constitutionalsystem to "move forward" and avert what would bedetrimental to Hong Kong's development - prevent itspolitical ecology from radicalising, its political situationfrom worsening and its government from weakening.By doing so, they can also bring about a new era ofhealthy interactions. We support the "amended DCplan". Its adoption would greatly delight us.

At this critical moment two matters are worthdiscussing - how the central government should lookat the "amended DC plan" and how the plan wouldhelp extricate Hong Kong from political difficulty.

We propose to talk about the central government'sstance first. On the face of it, even if the SARgovernment's package is thrown out, the centralgovernment will lose nothing. However, we think that, ifit believes so, it misreads the situation, and that wouldnot conduce to Hong Kong's overall interests.

First, the rejection of the SAR government'spackage will have totally different effects to that of its2005 package. Because the pan-democratic camp wasdivided over the "by election-referendum", it becamepossible for central government officials and moderatedemocrats to meet for the first time in twenty-oneyears. They talked about constitutional arrangementsat their "ice-breaking" meeting. As it has come to thefore, the central government can no longer say it hasnothing to do with the fate of the SAR government'spackage. Who should be to blame if it is thrown out? Ina survey the Public Opinion Programme at theUniversity of Hong Kong recently carried out, 34% ofthe respondents said the central government, 28% thedemocrats, and 19% CE Donald Tsang. The figuressuggest that the rejection of the package would tarnishthe central government's image among citizens andlower it in their estimation.

Second, the central government must not look atthe fate of the SAR government's package inisolation. It must have regard to the whole situationand examine what may result from its rejection beforeit can come to the right decision. It is quite certain that,if, notwithstanding the moderate democrats' talks withcentral government officials, the SAR government'spackage is thrown out, their dialogue line will be seenas unsuccessful, the hawks' antagonistic line will gainground, the hawks will dictate the pan-democrats'

course, Hong Kong's political ecology will radicalise,antagonism will grow between the government and thepublic, internal strife will intensify, and the governmentwill be in even direr difficulty.

Some of the members of the Democratic Partyand the Alliance for Universal Suffrage whom LOCPG(Liaison Office of the Central People's Government)deputy director Li Gang has met with the centralgovernment's authorisation sit on the standingcommittee of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support ofPatriotic Democratic Movements in China. Over thepast twenty-one years, the central government hasregarded the Hong Kong Alliance as hostile. It used torefuse to have anything to do with any of its leaders.The central government has however broken its owntaboo. Upholding the principle of agreeing to differand maximising common ground, it has allowed AlbertHo, Cheung Man-kwong and Richard Tsoi, who sit onthe Hong Kong Alliance's standing committee, to havea formal meeting with Li Gang in the LOCPG building.That signifies not only the central government'ssincerity and goodwill but also the great courage onthe part of the central government leaders who madethe decision. Important as it is, great courage onlybreaks deadlocks. It takes great wisdom to removewhat makes it hard to carry out constitutional reform.We hope that, at this critical moment, centralgovernment leaders will display such wisdom thatdifficulties will disappear. We hope they will seize theopportunity to usher in a new era of Hong Kong politicsand government. In our view, the "amended DC plan"the Democratic Party and the Alliance for UniversalSuffrage have put forward is what central governmentleaders can avail themselves of to display their greatwisdom. (to be continued)

2010.06.17明報社評

區會改良方案政改唯一活路

政府就2012 年兩個選舉辦法的決議案，下周三提交立法會討論和表決，經過逾半年事態演變和各方折衝樽俎，情勢顯示這次政改之成敗，現正處於關鍵時刻，剩下來唯一可以使政制向前推進的活門，就是民主黨和終極普選聯盟的區議會改良方案（下稱改良方案）。我們認為中央和建制陣營應該從香港大局出發，給改良方案開綠燈，此舉不但使政制向前走，避免出現不利香港發展的「三化」——政治生態激化、政局惡化、政府管治弱化，同時也可以為日後良性互動開創新局面。我們支持改良方案，樂觀其成。

處此關鍵時刻，有兩點值得討論，一是中央的取態，二是改良方案可以為香港政治困局解套。

關於中央的取態，表面上政改再次被否決，中央並無什麼損失，但是我們認為若中央如此判斷，會是誤判，不利於香港整體大局。

首先，今次若再遭到否決，與2005 年相比，所衍生效應絕不相同，主要是今年民主派就補選、公投出現兩條路線分歧，促成了中央與溫和民主派21 年來首次破冰會晤，商討政改安排。所以，今年中央站到台前，特區政府方案的成敗，不能再置身事外。根據港大民意研究計劃的最新民調，若政府的政改方案不獲通過，是誰之過？34%受訪市民認為中央要負最大責任，其次是民主派（28%）、行政長官曾蔭權（19%）。數字顯示，若政改方案再遭否決，會損害中央在市民心目中的形象和地位。

其次，中央不宜孤立地看待這次政改成敗，必須從盱衡全局的高度，檢視可能衍生的效應，作出正確決定。目前幾可肯定的是，如果溫和民主派與中央溝通後，政改方案仍然拉倒，則民主派的溝通對話路線會被視為失敗，鷹派對抗路線勢將抬頭，主導日後泛民陣營的路向，本港政治生態必定激化，屆時朝野尖銳對立，內耗加劇，政府管治更加舉步維艱。

獲中央授權的中聯辦副主任李剛，所會晤的民主黨和普選聯部分成員，有支聯會常委身分，21 年以來，中央視支聯會為敵對團體，過去根本不會與其領導層接觸，這次中央突破本身禁忌，本諸「求大同、存大異」原則，讓何俊仁、張文光、蔡耀昌等支聯會常委進入中聯辦，與李剛正式會晤，此舉不但顯示中央的誠意和善意，作此決策的領導人，更是大勇氣表現。大勇氣是重要的，但仍只能打破僵局；若要解決政改困局，需要大智慧。期望領導人在此關鍵時刻，顯示大智慧化解困局，掌握契機，為香港政局和管治開創新局面。民主黨和普選聯提出的區議會改良方案，我們認為是讓領導人顯示大智慧的切入點。（待續）

Glossary

throw out

decide not to accept.

in isolation

alone, separately.

agree to differ

If two people agree to differ, they accept theyhave different views about something butdecide not to discuss it any longer.