Motion Debate on "the Amendment to the Method for the Selection of the Chief Executive"

(21 December 2005)

MR JAMES TIEN (in Cantonese): Madam President, the Liberal Party opines that the constitutional development of Hong Kong must fulfil three principles: balanced participation, gradual and orderly progress and compatibility with the actual situation in Hong Kong. All these principles are laid down by both the National People's Congress and the Basic Law for the constitutional development of Hong Kong.

We think that the constitutional reform package put forward in the Fifth Report of the Government precisely strikes a reasonable balance among all these three principles.

It is proposed in the Fifth Report that all District Council (DC) members shall automatically become members of the Election Committee (EC) and the number of EC members shall be increased to 1 600. All DC members shall be able to participate in electing the Chief Executive, meaning that the latter shall be indirectly elected by the 3 million or so electors returning the directly elected DC members. There will thus be an increase in representativeness and legitimacy, in line with the principle of gradual and orderly progress.

The current membership of the EC is equally shared among the four sectors. As a result of the addition of all DC members, the number of political figures in the EC will increase drastically to 700, which is far larger than the number of members from the other three sectors. However, since roughly one quarter of all DC members are from the industrial and commercial sectors and those from the professions also occupy one fifth of the membership, it can be said that the package can already strike a proper balance between "balanced participation" and "gradual and orderly progress". For this reason, we will support the package.

By "in the light of the actual situation", it is meant that we should determine the pace of democratization on the basis of the prevailing conditions in society. For example, are there sufficient political talents in society? Are political parties well-prepared? Have the various social sectors, including the industrial and commercial sectors, reached any consensus on the implementation of universal suffrage?

The Liberal Party is of the view that the various social sectors should reach a consensus on the above questions as early as possible and make active efforts to create the necessary conditions, so as to achieve early the ultimate aim of universal suffrage as set down in the Basic Law. At the same time, active actions should be taken to nurture political talents, so that people from a wider range of social strata can participate in politics.

Madam President, the Liberal Party hopes that the whole process, a roadmap and a timetable can be formulated as early as possible, and that attempts can be made as much as possible to create the necessary social conditions and environment for the election of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage in 2012.

From the perspective of democratic development, the present package is certainly able to take forward our constitutional development. And, support for the Fifth Report and the struggle for a roadmap and a timetable should not be considered mutually exclusive.

If people insist on bundling up the passage of the reform package and a timetable, and if they thus vote down the package, the constitutional development of Hong Kong will only be forced to mark time. We do not think that the people of Hong Kong will wish to see such a situation. Has society as a whole really reached a consensus on a roadmap and a timetable? According to the survey findings released by The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) in early November, 34% of the respondents wanted universal suffrage in 2007 and 2008; 35% of them were for the year 2012; and, 18% of them viewed that universal suffrage should be implemented after 2012. The findings show that people still have different views on exactly which year should be chosen for the implementation of universal suffrage for the two major elections.

The Government has made it clear that the Commission on Strategic Development will hold discussions on formulating a roadmap, and that a conclusion will be reached in early 2007. It is also said that a timetable will then be formulated. This is already a very solid commitment. The opinion poll findings released by academic and non-government institutions since the announcement of the constitutional reform package have all indicated that the number of people supporting the package is far larger than that of those against it. For example, according to the findings of the survey conducted by CUHK in late October, 58.8% of the respondents accepted the package and 23.6% did not. The survey findings released by CUHK on 28 November, however, showed a drop in the number of supporters to 45.8%; the number of those against the package went up to 24.7% on the other hand. However, the survey findings released by the Lingnan University on 1 December also showed that 49% of the respondents supported the package and only 21.8% of them were against it.

The Liberal Party also conducted a telephone survey from 8 December to 20 December interviewing 3 000 respondents. The respondents were asked whether they would agree that the Legislative Council should pass the Government's constitutional reform package on 21 December. In response, 53.6% of them answered in the affirmative and 23.7% of them answered in the negative. The rest said that they did not have any opinion. The ratio of supporters to opponents was larger than 2:1.

Since the mainstream public opinion in Hong Kong is for a pragmatic treatment of the constitutional reform package, the Liberal Party also hopes that the various social sectors can conduct rational discussions and seek to forge a consensus, so that the political system of Hong Kong can progress on a steady and solid basis.

The revised package put forward by the Government proposes to reduce the number of appointed DC members by one third starting from 2007. If this adjustment can persuade the pan-democratic camp to accept the package, the Liberal Party will render its support for the common good. We support the retention of appointed DC membership because the ratio of elected DC members to appointed ones is as large as 4:1 and the latter cannot possibly dominate the situation in DCs. Any rash attempts to abolish appointed membership will only produce negative impacts on the functioning of DCs. The reason is that many appointed DC members from the industrial and commercial sectors and the professions can provide alternative and valuable opinions for the reference of their DCs and they do not seek only to express their views through voting.

We do not agree that voting on the package should be deferred. Members belonging to the democratic camp insist on the formulation of a roadmap and a timetable; their focus is not on appointed membership. To put it more directly, they want to achieve all in one go, to implement universal suffrage for the two major elections in 2012. Therefore, even if we defer the matter, no agreement can possibly be reached in the near future. Besides, we will have to elect a new Chief Executive in March 2007, so there are only some 15 months left. This is not to speak of the fact that we must still enact local legislation for it. Therefore, time is already running out and there is no more time for working out a new package.

With the passage of the package, we can take a great step in democratization. And, marking time will only take us farther away from universal suffrage. The findings of opinion polls have clearly shown that most people support the package, so there is no reason for pan-democratic camp Members to ignore all these views. Members of the pan-democratic camp are very united today. It seems that they have already reached some kind of tacit understanding. If they can secure enough votes, they will not go on talking and will just put the matter to the vote. However, while they are so happy, they must realize that they at least owe the people of Hong Kong an explanation: Why do they think that the passage of the package today will produce negative impacts on or deter the demand for universal suffrage? Most importantly, by blocking the passage of the motion today, how can they help the people of Hong Kong satisfy their demand for universal suffrage? Thank you, Madam President.