With students taking to the streets this week in Hong Kong and pro-democracy protesters planning to stage a sit-in protest in the coming week in the heart of Asia’s leading financial center, one of the most vocal and articulate supporters of greater democracy in Hong Kong, the former Chief Secretary Anson Chan, is trying to find some room to compromise with the pro-Beijing camp on how to elect the territory’s leader, the chief executive.
Mrs. Chan, who ran Hong Kong’s civil service in the last British colonial administration and continued in that post in the first few years after the 1997 handover to Chinese rule, said she wanted to change the way the city chooses the 1,200 people who make up Hong Kong’s election committee. The government in Beijing commands the loyalty of most of these people, many of whom are picked by corporate boards in a range of industries like tourism and accounting.
If Hong Kong adopts a system of universal suffrage, those 1,200 electors will become a nominating committee that vets candidates for the next chief executive. The stringent guidelines announced last month by China’s National People’s Congress on how this group will work have sparked protests in Hong Kong and led to the plan for the sit-in protest, called Occupy Central, in the coming week. The democracy advocates fear the nominating committee’s makeup will guarantee that only pro-Beijing candidates can run for election, robbing Hong Kong voters of a genuine choice.
But Mrs. Chan, while dismayed by Beijing’s rules, thinks there is some room to make the system better, even within the stringent guidelines. At present, the dozens of committee members from functional constituencies — like those from the insurance, information technology and tourism sectors — are not picked by individuals but by organizations, and reliably support Beijing. In an interview, Mrs. Chan discussed the possibility of allowing the workers in those fields to cast ballots for electors, a system that could result in committee members who are more sympathetic to democrats:
Lawmakers such as Regina Ip of the pro-Beijing New People’s Party have suggested changes to the functional constituencies that would be within the constraints of the National People’s Congress guidelines. These people say there is room for maneuver.
This is an area that my group is now focusing on. We are looking at every single possibility to find room for maneuver. But you know what the government has already floated? Of course, they fly these kites in government-friendly newspapers. But their latest suggestion through The Oriental Daily is to say, “Yes, we will look at widening the representativeness of the four sectors.”
For example, instead of giving 60 seats to a dying industry like agriculture and fisheries, we’re going to reduce it by 20, let’s say, to 40. And we’re going to give the vote to women. Why women? Because they know very well that all of the women’s groups, these so-called clansmen’s associations, welfare societies, N.G.O.s and whatnot, are completely dominated by pro-Beijing supporters. This is the degree of infiltration that has steadily taken place in the past few years. That’s why they’re very happy to say, “O.K., on the face of it, I’m widening the representativeness.”
But are they going to look objectively at getting in people who are neutral who are prepared to look objectively? No. They are going to get in their own cronies who will make sure that the votes you want are delivered.
Where do you see the room to maneuver?
What I have done is I have tried to get some of the individual functional constituencies to pressure them to widen their electorate. Basically, it’s best if it comes from them. So, for example, you look at the insurance sector functional constituency. There’s no reason why it should currently be just corporate votes, because every person in the insurance industry needs to be registered as an agent. So why don’t you say, O.K., I replace the corporate vote and I give a vote to every registered insurance agent. That would immediately widen the representativeness. So, similarly, I’m trying to get the I.T. sector involved, tourism and whatnot. I’ve written to several of these people and say, hey, why don’t you people start thinking about how your electorate can be widened and why don’t you put proposals to the government? And I’m happy to come and talk to you and maybe discuss with you what are the possibilities.
So some of these people — I.T. professionals, travel agents — who would be more sympathetic than the corporate votes?
At least it would be more difficult for them to control each and every vote, whereas they can through the corporate votes now. Because you look at the 1,200. I can tell you, 950 are definitely in the pockets of Beijing and will do exactly what they are told.
So the trick is to get that 950 number down?
Yes. By replacing the corporate votes. I noticed that the N.P.C. decision did not specifically say we are going to maintain corporate votes. So this is one area that we’re going to explore.
So there is room for maneuver?
If the government is willing. But as usual, they can choose to interpret what is in black and white any old way they’d like.