Letter from Chairman
Posted on : 10 Jul 2010
Letter from Chairman >>

10 July 2010

Dear Fellow Members, How do you do?

Today, I wish to share with you my thought about our “de facto referendum” movement. As admitted by our Party leader, the turnout rate in the by-elections is disappointing; however, the motion submitted to the voters has been passed#1; and the fact that half a million voters expressing their staunch support under the harsh conditions is not to be ignored. I have indicated in the Civic Newsletter issued last June that to recognize the nature of the “de facto referendum” movement is more important than to fuss over the turnout rate. I mean that this movement is but a starting move of the larger “New Democracy Movement” (NDM). The NDM emphasizes the connections between democracy and people’s livelihood, with the subject and participatory roles of citizens and civic groups made prominent. Thus, it is premature to conclude on the “de facto referendum” movement. What can be said now pertains to its short-term impacts only.

        Our situation in the political game resembles a man standing in a brook, with its flow never the same. It matters whether someone is standing there. It also matters whether and how he moves and joined by others. The impact of human agency is the results of a balance of power vis-à-vis the nature. This constitutes my view of the movement, an ever changing process with expandable horizons. We can raise a few questions about the flow of the political game. First, without this movement, would there be the Alliance for Universal Suffrage? Secondly and in the same vein, would there be ardent participation by many post-80 youths and civic groups in the fight? Thirdly, short of this movement, would the SAR Government ever bother to mount a Hercules campaign selling its replayed District Council Package? Fourthly, why should the Chief Executive invite Audrey Eu for a televised debate, had the by-elections drawn less than half a million voters? Lastly, without the image of the otherwise moderate Civic Party becoming radical as a reflection of plausible trend in society, would the Central Government care to talk with the Democratic Party and at the end accept its improved District Council Package? #2

        Next, it is in order to ascertain how this round of the political reform game differs from that in 2005 (please see Table 1). We can note that this time, the public discussion is much more lively and to the point. Specifically, it represents a 20% increase in volume. Besides, the count does not include those discussions carried on in the new mass media like Facebook, Twitter and so on, since they are more difficult to statistically tally. More importantly, the focus of discussions has become more focused because of our strategic move. The discussions back in 2005 did not touch what is genuine universal suffrage at all. Debates over the abolition or otherwise of functional constituency has since doubled, due to our making it the main theme of the “de facto referendum” campaign. We have succeeded in navigating the flow of the political brook.

Table 1—Political Reform Discussion as recorded in the print media (titles)

        Whether the discussions were lively or not, the key lies in their effects. As attested to by a few opinion polls conducted by academic institutions, our electoral campaign against the retention of functional constituency proves to be consequential (Table 2) #3. Had we started our propaganda earlier on, we might have galvanized much more public support for the cause.

Table 2 – Shift in Public Opinion on the Fate of Functional Constituency (%)#4

I am certain that we gained even more support against functional constituency right after the Donald-Audrey Debate on 17 June, although no pertinent poll was conducted at the material time. The same estimate applies equally should the Central Government chose not to accept the improved District Council Package proposed by the Democratic Party. A poll on the immediate impact of the Debate was carried out by HKU Public Opinion Programme and found a dramatic shift of opinion, with 45% of the respondents rejecting the Government’s package and a mere 20% accepting. #5

        Summing up the messages conveyed by the two Tables, we have heightened up the discussions on the future of functional constituency as well as won increasing support for its abolition. This is the major gain of our “de facto referendum” movement. What I regret most refers to our inability to spend more time in persuading the Democratic Party to join our movement. Otherwise, its impact would have been greater and more beneficial to the overall democratic development in Hong Kong.

        While our moves have worked somehow, we should nevertheless think of adjustment since the flow of the brook is no longer the same as before. We need of course to stand firm on our policy positions and uphold the overall interest of the democratic movement. A number of fellow members do worry about risks of the Party suffering from decline. Such worries serve a positive function of keeping us constantly alert. Yet, I am pretty certain that we will not give up our foundation vision and mission. Nor will we evolve like the League of Social Democrats. Instead, we should continue to guard social justice and promote the new democracy movement, in rational, professional and strategically/tactically measured ways. There is no sign that we as a party organization have been greatly harmed. Our fundraising efforts in this year’s rallies of June-Four and July-First have achieved record-breaking results. There has been no exodus of members. From last October up to the present, we have indeed lost 15 members, four of the resignations having to do with dissatisfaction with our movement strategy#6. At the same time, the loss has been compensated by the admission of 23 new members. As to the state of our social support, findings of poll in varying degree of reliability are available for study. The said Public Opinion Programme of HKU maintains a quarterly poll on support for ten most known political parties/groups, using a 100-point scale ranging from zero for “no support at all” to 100 for “absolute support”. Findings of the newest poll indicate a decline in support for all parties/groups. The score obtained by the Civic Party has gone down from 49.5 last August to 44.5, standing between the best score of 49.9 won by The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions and the worst one of 36.5 received by the League of Social Democrats, i.e. at a worrisome rank (the 7th) #7. In polls conducted by Mingpao between 24 and 27 June on changes in social support for political parties/groups, our Party turns out to be “the only winners,” experiencing an increase in support by 42%#8. The above findings offer no more than just some references and should be interpreted with great caution. At the end of the day, the real test awaits the elections in the next two years. The cardinal lesson to be drawn from the recent seesaw changes in Hong Kong’s politics has transpired as follows: only might moves things. The SAR Government favored the Democratic Party in talks, not least for its holding nine seats in the Legislative Council; without warm responses from the civil society, we would have achieved nothing. Hence, we need to persevere in our efforts to enhance our might. Your contribution would be most appreciated.