Ronny Tong, right
In an interview with Macau Daily Times, prominent Civic party member Ronny Tong says that final settlement on the Chief Executive election model should be put aside until agreement is made for universal suffrage for Legislative Council (LegCo) elections, which will see student leaders and as well as more radicals elected in 2016. This is to forestall proposing nominating committee arrangements for LegCo along the lines of the NPC Standing Committee framework for the Chief Executive election. Tong says he is the only pan-democrat legislator who has kept lines of communication open with Beijing. In September he criticized the pan-democrats for taking a hard line, which he says, hardened Beijing’s stance. Tong also outlines his ideal proposal for the Chief Executive election.
Macau Daily Times – Is it possible, as pro-Beijing people are saying, to bring more democracy to the NPC’s Chief Executive election framework?
Ronny Tong (RT) – The NPC is simply changing the name from Election Committee to Nominating Committee. You can play along with it, changing minor details. At the end of the day I just don’t think that it’s possible to enlarge the franchise of the so-called nominating committee.
MDT – So vetoing the proposal is the way to go?
RT – Unless the current proposal is vetoed by LegCo, I don’t think there will be any incentive for Beijing to continue this process of democratization. I think you have got to keep the pressure on. We have two goals; the Basic Law has two goals: one is universal suffrage for the Chief Executive, the second is universal suffrage for LegCo.
MDT – So how can we move on?
RT – One possibility is to say: right we pass the current proposal today and you promise the functional constituencies will be abolished in 2020 (LegCo election year). We’ll come back and look at the election of the Chief Executive again in 2017
MDT – You told me the focus on election reform for LegCo instead of for the CE is because of national sovereignty and security issues.
RT – Beijing is telling us that election of the Chief Executive involves a question of sovereignty and national security. So I say, if that’s your view, Hong Kong people can’t deal with that (because it’s beyond our remit – it’s the sole responsibility of the central government). Now what about universal suffrage for LegCo? You can’t say that’s a matter of sovereignty.
MDT – The plans for LegCo reform may be similar to the NPC decision on the CE election…
RT – A lot of people are already saying that universal suffrage for Legco can mean that the functional constituencies would nominate somebody for Hong Kong people to vote on. Right. Now I don’t want to have a situation where the current proposal is passed and we come round to 2020 and it’s the same problem, the same mental block. Let us put this question of election of the Chief Executive aside. Its something we can’t deal with now, so let’s look at long-term development. Are you (Beijing) going to say yes there will be universal suffrage in the same sense as we understand it; in other words complete abolition of functional constituencies. If you tell me that that is how you look at things then we can have a global package. Because you promised that this would be a gradual orderly process, that if today we don’t have genuine universal suffrage, then one day we shall have genuine universal suffrage.
MDT – What do think are the steps to get a new deal?
RT – There should be a channel of dialogue between Beijing and the pan-democrats, and then later on we can enlarge the channel to embrace everybody, because at the moment we and Beijing are the furthest apart. Let us try to bring these two together to work out a blueprint for the long-term democratic development of Hong Kong.
MDT – And if that doesn’t happen?
RT – Even assuming that there are enough people to vote in favor of the current proposal, let it go through. Come 2016 we are going have this problem all over again and God knows what’s going to happen, because people like me and others among the pan-democrats will not necessarily be around. In all likelihood we wouldn’t be around. It will be people out there – people occupying Central – those youngsters who will be calling the shots. So I can’t see how we can deal with this matter in this situation.
MDT – Do you think a twenty-year-old student leader will be elected? Joshua Wong will be twenty in September 2016 – the next LegCo election.
RT – Why not? I mean there is no age limit. Once they’ve reached voting age.
MDT – Joshua Wong, Scholarism leader, legislator?
RT – Yes, he can be elected. And I can almost guarantee that he will be a legislator in two years’ time, because under our current voting system, someone like him can easily get 30,000 votes or 40,000 votes and he can easily get elected right?
I can tell you in 2016 the radicals will be the majority of the pan-democrats in LegCo, because, as I say, under the proportional representation system it is easy for them to gain a seat in each.
MDT – You mentioned your proposal as the ideal method for electing a moderate Chief Executive?
RT – One third of the committee should be represented by district councilors, who will be elected by everybody in Hong Kong (voters), basically universal suffrage; one third remains to the professional representatives, what we have at the moment; and one-third the commercial sector. Under that arrangement people can, through their nomination of district councilors, nominate somebody they want. There should be between five to seven candidates and you vote on an instant run-off basis, which is vote transfer basis to try to find somebody who is supported by the majority who is moderate.
Now that system is deigned to elect somebody of moderate views and who is most acceptable; not the most favorable, not the most popular, but the most acceptable candidate to become the Chief Executive. That’s my proposal. Robert Carroll, Hong Kong
No Comments