Doves' plan

THE curtain has come down on thefive five--constituency by by--election. Since theestablishmentarians boycotted it, and hawksand doves were in a two two--line struggle in thepan pan--democratic camp, a low turnout was expected.

Those who refrained from going to the pollsyesterday fall into two groups. In one are those whoalways support the establishmentarians. Their ideas ofdemocratisation differ radically from thepan pan--democrats'. In the other are supporters of thepan pan--democrats. They ardently crave democracy, butthey disapprove of the radical approach the alliancebetween the Civic Party and the League of SocialDemocrats has used. The low turnout may be taken asevidence that Hong Kong people do not approve of the"de facto referendum" strategy, but it is wrong to take itto mean they do not support democracy or theysupport the government's constitutional reformpackage. Hong Kong people do crave democratisationand genuine universal suffrage. Beijing must notmisread the situation.

Some months ago, some pan pan--democratic doves(including academics, members of the public and anumber of Democratic Party legislators) formed theAlliance for Universal Suffrage. It unveiled on 13 March2010 its proposed constitutional reform plan. Thedoves' plan represents a paradigm shift in thediscussion of Hong Kong's constitutional system, forthe moderate democrats have adopted a totally newstrategy - to protect their rivals' interests.

According to Cheung Man Man--kwong, a DemocraticParty legislator, the Alliance proposes that, in 2020,the Legislative Council should have 100 members.

Under the doves' plan, 50 of them would be returnedby geographical constituencies through directelections. There would be seven instead of fivegeographical constituencies. All voters would cast theirsecond votes for political parties, each of which wouldhave a share of the remaining 50 seats proportional toits shares of the vote vote..

The idea of the plan is to safeguard rivals'interests. Unthinkable as it is, it has its theoreticalbasis. The basic idea is that, under the new plan, thebasic interests of all the parties to the agreementwould be protected. In short, to come to an agreement,the reformers and the establishmentarians must makesure that the new system would safeguard both sides'interests and would wipe neither side out.

The Alliance for Universal Suffrage's package isby no means perfect. However, the doves have takengreat pains. To ensure that Hong Kong people willenjoy universal suffrage, they are prepared to fetterthemselves and limit the pan pan--democratic camp's powerwith systems. It is a shame that theestablishmentarians have yet to make any significantmove in response to it.

The establishmentarians have bashed radicaldemocrats' "de facto referendum" in a high high--profilemanner and, at the same time, cold cold--shoulderedmoderate democrats' "win win--win" plan. As they havetaken such an attitude, how can people believe theysincerely want Hong Kong's constitutional system toprogress?

If the doves are so disheartened by theestablishmentarians' stalling that they believe theircalls for communication will lead them nowhere nowhere, the, situation will only work to the hawks' advantage. Thefire of radicalism will burn even more fiercely. Thatwould not do Hong Kong any good. Therefore, theestablishmentarians must not allow themselves to beintoxicated by the low turnout. The central governmentand the SAR government must especially be sober.

Hong Kong's constitutional development is now at acritical juncture. They should seize the opportunity tointeract constructively with moderate democrats anddo away with what has hindered Hong Kong'sconstitutional reform.

明報社評

2010.05.17

補選落幕建制派應對「鴿派方案」釋出善意

5 區補選落幕了，由於建制派不參與，以及泛民有鷹鴿兩條路線之爭，所以，投票率低是意料中事。

昨日選擇不投票的人可分兩大類：一是傳統建制派的支持者，他們對民主的訴求與泛民有根本的分別；另一類則是泛民的支持者，他們對民主有堅實的追求，只是不認同公社聯盟的激進手法，因而選擇不投票。因此，昨日的低投票率，一個解讀是港人不認同「變相公投」這手段，但不可以解讀為港人不支持民主，甚或解讀為港人支持特區政府的政改方案。港人對民主、對要求落實真普選，有堅定不移的訴求，北京不要錯誤解讀。

過去幾個月，民主派的鴿派（包括民主黨多名立法會議員、學者和社會人士）組成了「終極普選聯盟」，他們於今年3 月13 日公布了政改建議，這個「鴿派方案」是香港政制討論的重要範式轉移，因為溫和民主派採取一個全新的策略──從「保障對方的利益」出發。

民主黨立法會議員張文光強調，大聯盟建議2020 年立法會增至100 席， 50席分區直選，選區從現時5 個重劃為7 個；另外50 席由全港選民不分選區投第二票給政黨，各政黨按得票比例分配議席。

這個方案的重點是「為對手着想」，看似匪夷所思，實則有其理論根據。其基礎是參與協議者的基本利益在新遊戲規則下將得到保障。簡言之，建制派與改革派要達成協議，就要確保新政制不會把對方趕盡殺絕，雙方利益都得到保障。

鴿派方案絕非完美，但用心良苦，為了實現普選，不惜在制度上自我約束，限制民主派的力量，確保對手獲得一定比例的議席。可惜，這方案迄今沒有得到建制派任何有意義的回應。

建制派一方面高調打擊激進民主派的「變相公投」，另一方面冷待溫和民主派的雙贏方案，如此取態，怎能叫人相信建制派是有誠意推動香港政制向前走？

如果鴿派被建制派拖至心灰意冷，認定溝通之路是虛假的話，只會益了鷹派，令激進之火愈燒愈烈，這決非香港之福。所以，建制派勿為昨天的低投票率而自我陶醉，特區政府和中央尤其要頭腦清醒，在這個香港政制發展的關鍵時刻，把握機會，與溫和民主派形成良性互動，打破政改瓶頸。

Glossary

paradigm //''ppaarr ???da daIIm/ m/ shift

a great and important change in the way something is done or thought about.

vote

The vote means the total number of votes in anelection.

nowhere

If something leads you nowhere, it has nosuccessful result for you.