HK Observer | Credibility at stake again

Robert Carroll

According to the government’s report, recently submitted to Beijing, which focused on the Occupy Central movement, it is the common aspiration of those in Hong Kong to have universal suffrage in 2017 “as scheduled and strictly in accordance with the Basic Law and [Beijing’s rulings]”.  There appears to be nothing wrong with the first part, which invokes the idea of “one person, one vote” in 2017 for the CE, but the second, in part, is plain distortion. The NPC’s rulings have been highly controversial and a primary driving force behind the Occupy movement. Wasn’t this report a consequence of a government meeting with student leaders, where an official promise was made to reflect public opinions?
It does seem as though the government is obstinately refusing to take any responsibility at all for creating the crisis when surely it must take part of the blame. As with the representatives of the people of Hong Kong who misinformed Beijing about popular sentiment over constitutional reform, in the summer report on public survey on constitutional development, the onus was on the government’s court not to provide the report that they thought Macau and Hong Kong Affairs Office and Beijing would like to receive. Given the massive outpouring of protest both on the streets and social media, and, after having an openly broadcast meeting with student leaders, it would have been more sensible to relax a little and to show that the protestors’ views were reflected.  The alternative would be to keep singing the same tune.
A number of CY Leung’s political critics accuse him of stubbornness and a refusal to admit mistakes, while others accuse him of being a yes-man for Beijing who fails to stand up for the people of Hong Kong. If the former is true, considering he backed down late last year over remarks that poor people should not be allowed to vote, there should have been the hope that there could be flexibility over the latest report. It is a pity if he has not seen this missed opportunity to reach out to the next generation of Hong Kong voters, many of whom will be casting their ballots for the first time in the 2016 Legislative Council election, and possibly in the 2017 Chief Executive election pending the approval of the universal reform bill. On the other hand, if the latter is true and he is, as many believe,  a puppet for Beijing, then could we have expected any better? Should all who believe in a more representative government give up as the unequal struggle continues between the more liberal forces here and on the mainland, and conservative forces over there who dominate Chinese and Hong Kong governments?
No. No one can predict the future. History regularly presents astonishing surprises. For example, who would have foreseen that the student movement would have grown so fast and so extensively, culminating in the Occupy movement? Who would have predicted that a demographic once regarded as politically apathetic would now be so engaged and have such eloquent leaders displaying budding political skills?