I was recently invited to a meeting with Lord Howe who was passing through Hong Kong at the end of his China visit. He was easy and friendly and full of wit. Yet I must confess the meeting stirred up half-forgotten unpleasant memories of the anxious day of the Sino-British talks 20 years ago, and then, after the short euphoria of the Joint Declaration, the days of bitter disappointment in the fight for democracy for Hong Kong. How British Officials rebuffed us then! The democrats were such an unwelcome disruption to smooth Sino-British relations. Humiliated the British delegation may have been at the negotiation table, but they were in agreement with the Chinese Government that democracy could only be a distant goal for Hong Kong people, and the progress to democracy to be left to Beijing to decide. We who clamoured for more democracy faster were treated by the British administration with arrogance and contempt, or else with respect and pity, as either uncouth or unrealistic or both, and with or without laudable intentions, bad for Hong Kong's future. The last Governor, Chris Patten, took a different view and followed different tactics, but by then it was too little, too late. At any rate, Patten was blamed as "the sinner of a thousand years" not only by Chinese officials but also by officials and former officials of the British Foreign Office, for daring to challenge Beijing, thereby destroying continuity and Hong Kong's progress towards democracy.
But enough of reminiscence. Especially bad memories. Suffice that one should be reminded that it is no good waiting for someone to give you democracy like a Christmas present for having been a good boy or a good girl throughout the year. If we want democracy we must go and get it, without waiting for the perfect C.E. candidate, or for the "mature" political parties to develop. The candidate and the parties will come naturally with the system, not the other way round. Everyone should know by now that enemies of democracy do not oppose democracy in principle. They only say, not now, not just yet. Wait till we have the right candidate who we are sure will be good for Hong Kong. The peculiar thing is, an amazing number of people buy that. In any democracy the election precedes the elected. In Hong Kong we believe it is safe to allow an election to be held only when we are perfectly sure who will be elected.
I think the only really essential conditions for democracy are an intelligent electorate and the possibility of holding a fair and open election. Hong Kong already has both. The march on 1 July has proved this beyond a reasonable doubt.
I listened very carefully on a number of occasions to the arguments put forward by my LegCo colleagues against the election of the CE by universal suffrage in 2007 and direct election for all LegCo members in 2008. The Chairman of the DAB, Tsang Yok Shing, argues that the DAB supports such elections, but the business community is against it, because they strongly believe functional constituencies must be retained. The Chairman of the Liberal Party, James Tien, who owns that he represents the business community, argues that economic success is what counts in Hong Kong; the discontent behind the march on 1 July was about the economy, about unemployment, about negative equity, and the solution lies in reviving the economy, which is far better achieved under the present system, rather than having more direct elections which will result in stronger welfare demands.
I do not think the majority of the half a million who marched on 1 July would agree with James Tien's view. Their discontent was not just about the economy. Their discontent was about the lack of leadership and bad governance. These are political complaints and need to be addressed by political measures. Economic favours granted by the Central Government may help in the short term. They will not go on for ever. In the long term Hong Kong must rely on itself and its own assets and capabilities, and we would still need political leadership, and a Hong Kong SAR Government which matches the expectation of Hong Kong people and is truly accountable to them.
However, whatever the wider Hong Kong public may want, the reality is that within LegCo there is a sufficient majority to block democracy at present. It is not just the DAB and the Liberal Party, but also the overwhelming majority among the so-called "independents" who hold functional constituency seats. In practice, there will be no democracy unless they can be persuaded to change their stance – or are voted out of their LegCo Office.
Those who believe in democracy should never give up persuasion. But we do not have to rely on argument alone. The march of half a million has taught us how powerful mass action can be. No one can expect a march of half-a-million every month. But the public can speak through the ballot box. The District Council election will be held on 23 November. We should make sure that candidates and political parties which supported pushing through the Government's Article 23 legislation and which have been blocking democracy are voted out. This will be a strong message, and a good precussor for the crucial LegCo election 10 months ahead.
Ten months is
not a long time in which to do the work.
If you are serious about democracy, you should start now, whether as
potential candidate or conscientious voter. Attention has to be focused on the functional constituencies
as well, and not just the geographical constituencies. Alternative candidates should be
encouraged to come forward to challenge those who have lost credibility before
the public. We should help them to
win in the election in the same way we won the reprieve for Article 23
legislation. Each of us should
participate actively by keeping ourselves well-informed, and swing into action
by campaigning for these candidates.
Many of the FC's are very small, and candidates often win by default in
effect, because many voters don't bother to turn up to vote, sometimes because
they don't know much about the candidates, sometimes because they don't believe
they can make a difference. This
attitude can be changed, and we can help to change it. The FC system is a device to give a
large say to a small number of privileged people. Then let us use the system to help democracy.
I believe together we can win, we can bring about the crucial difference. Having 29 votes in LegCo will be enough to ensure no Government proposal which the public opposes will be passed. Thirty-one votes in LegCo will ensure Government will need to take the community's demands seriously.
Forty votes will make up the two-thirds majority required for constitutional reform under the Basic Law. Sixteen FC votes will ensure a majority in that section of LegCo which up to now has been a powerful block against making the government accountable.
Did Lord Howe ever foresee a march of half a million in Hong Kong for freedom and democracy? Would he still hold that democracy is only a distant goal? It is crucial for us to realize that we have the power in our hands. Hong Kong has missed so many opportunities. We must not let opportunity pass us by again.