Last week I attended an evening forum at the Chinese University of Hong Kong organized by the student union as part of their orientation program. The topic was "Life without Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa" (董建華). This is not only the wish of many of the students, but also the fervent desire of many people in Hong Kong. Even those people who are not prepared to publicly urge Tung to step down will not deny that they welcome his early departure.
After the long summer recess, the Legislative Council (Legco) resumes its last session in the current four-year term. Legco will stop its operations in mid July next year, to be followed by an election in September. At the first sitting of the current Legco session on Oct. 8, I moved a motion on behalf of the Anti-Tung Solidarity calling on the chief executive to step down because of his failure to defend human rights and the rule of law, his inability to promote economic development and his refusal to conduct democratic political reforms.
Since Tung was anointed by Beijing and the tycoons to be the first chief executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) in July 1997, he has brought misery and degradation to many people in the territory. The number of households living in abject poverty -- earning less than HK$4,000 (US$517) a month -- has more than doubled from 85,000 in 1996 to almost 200,000 this year. Deflation has been raging for 60 months.
Tung's refusal to engage the public in the policy decision-making process and his tendency to listen only to those who are loyal to him have resulted in incoherent and unpopular policies and embarrassing U-turns. His lack of regard for civil liberties and the rule of law, which are the pillar of the territory's success, has caused resentment in the community. It was his rough attempt to rush the controversial bill on Article 23 of the Basic Law through Legco in July which triggered the massive demonstration on July 1.
Since that historic march, my motion debate in Legco was the first opportunity for members to address the issue of whether Tung should step down as demanded by many of the protesters. Public opinion surveys conducted since the demonstration consistently showed that more than 60 percent of the respondents do not want him as chief executive. Those who support him is about 20 percent.
In May, the Legco voted down a similar motion moved by independent member Albert Chan (陳偉業), and my motion was also defeated. However this does not mean the debate was a waste of time. As pro-democracy legislators have often said, although we are a minority in the undemocratically elected Legco, we represent the majority view in the community. As noted by an editorial in the South China Morning Post, "the debate served to underline the depth of negative feeling about Tung's style of leadership."
The political crisis triggered by the massive turnout on July 1 has not only devastated the establishment, but also aroused concern in Beijing that the authorities here might have lost control of the situation. In order to restore order and pacify the disgruntled, the central government has taken the unprecedented step of inviting many delegations to Beijing, to hear their views on how to solve the problems facing Hong Kong and on who should be the next chief executive.
In order to help maintain stability and boost confidence in the territory, Beijing has also bent over backwards to make a number of gestures. These included withdrawing the bill on Article 23, concluding the Closer Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) and allowing more Chinese tourists to visit the SAR. Plans are also afoot to cut the price of drinking water that the SAR buys from the Guangdong Province.
Thus if the political crisis is temporarily averted and the people are feeling slightly better, it is due to the efforts of Beijing and not because Tung has responded to the wishes of the masses by changing the style and substance of governance and by introducing democratic political reforms.
If Tung and his administration had taken active steps to address the concerns of the masses, I might not have to move my motion in Legco. Having seen Tung in action for over six years, however, many people believe he is unwilling and unable to change. Furthermore, Beijing's attempts to bail out Tung could have serious consequences.
The numerous visits to Beijing by Hong Kong delegations and the offers of economic assistance by the central government will inevitably blur the boundary of "one country, two systems" and create a climate for more intervention in the territory's affairs, thus undermining Hong Kong's "high degree of autonomy."
Of the many views reflected to the territory and central governments, one should be taken with utter caution. Some commentators said the July 1 demonstration was a protest by the middle class. This is highly misleading and will not help to solve the problems besetting Hong Kong.
The massive outpouring of anger and frustration on July 1 came from people from all walks of life. Many middle class professionals and managers indeed took part in the march, and many of them are hopping mad with Tung. But so did many people from the grassroots and their concerns are equally pressing. Thus it would be ridiculous to think the problems facing Hong Kong would be solved by addressing the concerns of the middle class. Such a mis-reading of the situation is unfortunate and unhelpful.
Besides inviting people from the territory to Beijing to air their grievances, the Chinese authorities have also sent emissaries to Hong Kong to sound the people out. Some people who recently met with these Chinese visitors said they referred to Tung in the past tense and were intensely interested in what should happen after Tung is gone. In a nutshell, they wanted to know what can be done to restore consensus and stability in the territory. The name of Henry Tang (唐英年), the current financial secretary who succeeded the disgraced Antony Leung (梁錦松), was floated as a possible successor to Tung.
Such enquiries show that the Chinese authorities are not as self-deceiving and naive as some people think. No doubt many people have seen the writing on the wall and the pro-government Legco members who voted down my motion are only hiding their heads in the sand.
During the motion debate I also pointed out the crisis of July 1 has had a deleterious effect on the authority of the Tung administration. A middle ranking civil ser-vant who took part in the big march recently told me: "This government has not got a shred of authority left. Many people now treat us with disrespect and even contempt. It is only professional people like us who are shoring the administration up." Such lack of morale within the civil service must be a matter of deep concern.
Last week the long-awaited report of the SARS Expert Committee was published. It quickly attracted a barrage of criticism for failing to identify the senior officials who should be held account-able for mishandling this crisis. Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food Yeoh Eng-kiong (楊永強) bore the brunt of the attacks in the media and was asked by several newspapers to step down. The question is, if Yeoh is under pressure to quit because he has mishandled the SARS outbreak, why shouldn't Tung, who has made many more blunders than Yeoh, be asked to step down?
On the day of my Legco motion debate, the people of California voted to banish unpopular Governor Gray Davis and elected Arnold Schwarzenegger to replace him. The people of Hong Kong looked on with deep envy, knowing full well that if we had the same opportunity here, Tung would be voted out of office in no time.
Emily Lau is a legislative councilor in Hong Kong and convener of the Frontier Party.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US