Stumbling blocks to a deal

The die is cast, as the date has been set for lawmakers to vote on the 2012 electoral reform package. On June 23, will the pan-democrats veto this opportunity for change at all costs?

The prospect of the proposal being passed isn't particularly encouraging, in view of the negative feedback to National People's Congress Standing Committee deputy secretary-general Qiao Xiaoyang's answer to the moderates' demands.

But would the Democratic Party and its pan-democratic peers react differently if they bother to study Qiao's comments with greater care? Fingers are crossed.

Qiao had touched on all their concerns, including the definition of universal suffrage, future of functional constituencies, election of legislators from district councils, and nomination of chief executive candidates when the chief executive is elected by universal suffrage.


英文虎報 Central Station | By Mary Ma

Qiao's personal understanding - or that of the central government - of universal suffrage is rather generic. Its core content is to protect the equal voting right of every citizen. But he also observed it is a global practice for places to adopt different electoral systems that also suit their actual situations.

Perhaps the more cynical ones in the pan-democrat camp find the generic definition far from satisfactory. But this was the first time Beijing elaborated on the definition of universal suffrage that the Basic Law stops short of defining.

In the opinion of some, this is already a half-step concession by the central government, if not a full one. But issues as abstract as definition should never be a stumbling block for breakthroughs.

Clearly, the pan-democratic moderates are particularly hung up on substances. What are they? Functional constituencies are one of them. Although Qiao said community views are split on functional constituencies and more discussions will be necessary, it would be misleading to say functional constituencies aren't going to change.

They're bound to change to conform with universal suffrage, according to Qiao's understanding.

In order to comply with the definition of equal voting rights as described by Qiao, it would be hard to imagine how the current arrangement of some having more votes than others wouldn't change.

If those standing in the way of a deal say the definition of universal suffrage and Qiao's open remarks in relation to functional constituencies will usher in tighter control, one may also argue it will indeed lead to a more democratic outcome in 2017 and 2020.

Another point to note is the election of the chief executive. What did Qiao say in this regard? He said the future arrangement under which the nominating committee nominates chief executive candidates will conform with democratic procedures. He also emphasized this future arrangement and the existing system are entirely different. Maybe the pan-democrats who dislike any threshold should mind the words "entirely different.'" Doesn't this pave the way for a more liberal approach for nominating the chief executive? Certainly, it's proper for Hong Kong to be careful in dealing with this, for it would be a nightmare for society if "Mad Dog" Raymond Wong Yuk-man were to be elected chief executive.