It was the Thai military junta who crafted the latest constitution which allowed Samak and his party and allies winning the recent election which in turn led to his appointment as the prime minister.
It is constitutional (never mind that it is frequently thrown out and replaced). Tt is democratic (never mind the farmers are not as educated as the middle class). Period.
If there is any violation of election law. It is the court that should adjudicate (never mind it makes a mockery over cookery). This is called the rule of law. Otherwise, the country might as well revert to absolute manarchy or just anarchy instead of feigning or aspiring to be a democracy.
The action by the unruly mob occupying the government building and airports are undemocratic mean tyring to bring down the popularly elected government. This is beyond legitimate civil disobedience.
The Thai King held in awe by most Thai is eerily silent. This is a big surprize to most observers. The King is known to be interventionist when the country is in difficult time. No wonder that the western media believes in royalist' involvement in this anti-Samak/Thaksin movement.
Thailand cannot allow a determined minority to thwart the will of the majority. Let's the rule of law and democracy prevail!
note: this is written in response to the Economist article "Where Cookery is Crookery" on Sept 13th edition.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Teenage Pregnancy and Sarah Palin
Pregnancy is a biological consequence of sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is a lifestyle choice of an individual, whether within or without a matrimonial context.
The decision to have sex or otherwise is strictly one's freedom. All these are part of an individual liberty.
In conservative societies, what matters is whether a child is born in a wedlock. The age of the mother and/or the father is mostly irrelevant. In liberal societies, teenage pregnancy is seen as a legitimate exercise of one's liberty.
Until as recently as the 20th century, most first born child in human history are probably result of teenage pregnancy.
The medical science recognizes that adolescent sexuality starts with the onset of puberty and this may mean as young as 8 or 9 years old. This doesn't mean that sexual freedom starts at 8 or 9 years old.
The widely accepted age of consent (coded in positive term) is within the range of 12-18 years old.
With urbanization and individualism becoming more entrenched in the modern society, teenage pregnancy creates a lot of social issues - abortion, infanticide, abandoned child, child abuse or neglect and single family.
The primary responsibility expected of parents, whether teenage or otherwise, toward the child remains the same - shelter, clothing, food, healthcare, education, love and care.
The crux of the issue of teenage pregnancy is often that the teenage parents (especially those without family support) are not economically able and sometimes psychologically ill-prepared to take up the parental responsibility.
Whether or not the society has a mechanism in place to assist such family (if exist), the child to teenage parents is more likely to suffer as a consequence.
This is not to say that older parents are always able to look after the child. This is also not to say that the teenage parents are unable to provide for the child. The point here is the probability of such happening.
The problem becomes exacerbated as there is often a vicious cycle with children to teenage parent becomes teenage parents themselves. All the social issues are then recycled.
How to reduce teenage pregnancy when the teenager are entitled to sexual freedom and the reproductive right?
Abortion is an option but it remains highly contentious in many societies including America that is represented by pro-life and pro-choice camps . The modern trend is toward legalizing abortion subject to certain conditions.
It maybe legally permissible in many societies, it is nevertheless scorned by the religious conservatives. With the society torn between secular right for pro-choice and religious or moral diktat for pro-life, pregnant teenager may have make a decision one way or the other to the regret of her life.
Sexual education, on the other hand, is the less contentious solution and less effective device.
Following the nomination of Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice President nominee, this has generated some attentions because of her 17 years old daughter who is pregnant.
Sarah Palin's pregnant teenage daughter is surely off limit.
Sarah Palin herself is not. She ought to be vetted for her record as an individual in all her different capacities.
Surely she cannot be faulted for her teenage daughter's exercise of sexual freedom. Likewise she cannot be faulted for the pregnancy.
The question is whether she discharges her parental responsibility to educate her children regarding sex and its consequence.
She is reportedly believed in sex education for children at school and at home.
What is not clear is what she wants to teach. Abstinence is favored and contraception is scorned by large number of religious conservatives, a core base of Republican support.
This may have confused her or she may have deliberately chosen to be imprecise because abstinence is an off mainstream idea and would have alienated her from many Hillarite supporters who are likely to subscribed to the idea that contraception is a responsible sexual practice for all ages.
If Sarah teaches abstinence, she fails. If she teaches contraception, she also fails. It is therefore not know whether she teaches, and if so, what she teaches.
Americans deserve to know her view on this. Hillarite supporters and independents stay tune!
The decision to have sex or otherwise is strictly one's freedom. All these are part of an individual liberty.
In conservative societies, what matters is whether a child is born in a wedlock. The age of the mother and/or the father is mostly irrelevant. In liberal societies, teenage pregnancy is seen as a legitimate exercise of one's liberty.
Until as recently as the 20th century, most first born child in human history are probably result of teenage pregnancy.
The medical science recognizes that adolescent sexuality starts with the onset of puberty and this may mean as young as 8 or 9 years old. This doesn't mean that sexual freedom starts at 8 or 9 years old.
The widely accepted age of consent (coded in positive term) is within the range of 12-18 years old.
With urbanization and individualism becoming more entrenched in the modern society, teenage pregnancy creates a lot of social issues - abortion, infanticide, abandoned child, child abuse or neglect and single family.
The primary responsibility expected of parents, whether teenage or otherwise, toward the child remains the same - shelter, clothing, food, healthcare, education, love and care.
The crux of the issue of teenage pregnancy is often that the teenage parents (especially those without family support) are not economically able and sometimes psychologically ill-prepared to take up the parental responsibility.
Whether or not the society has a mechanism in place to assist such family (if exist), the child to teenage parents is more likely to suffer as a consequence.
This is not to say that older parents are always able to look after the child. This is also not to say that the teenage parents are unable to provide for the child. The point here is the probability of such happening.
The problem becomes exacerbated as there is often a vicious cycle with children to teenage parent becomes teenage parents themselves. All the social issues are then recycled.
How to reduce teenage pregnancy when the teenager are entitled to sexual freedom and the reproductive right?
Abortion is an option but it remains highly contentious in many societies including America that is represented by pro-life and pro-choice camps . The modern trend is toward legalizing abortion subject to certain conditions.
It maybe legally permissible in many societies, it is nevertheless scorned by the religious conservatives. With the society torn between secular right for pro-choice and religious or moral diktat for pro-life, pregnant teenager may have make a decision one way or the other to the regret of her life.
Sexual education, on the other hand, is the less contentious solution and less effective device.
Following the nomination of Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice President nominee, this has generated some attentions because of her 17 years old daughter who is pregnant.
Sarah Palin's pregnant teenage daughter is surely off limit.
Sarah Palin herself is not. She ought to be vetted for her record as an individual in all her different capacities.
Surely she cannot be faulted for her teenage daughter's exercise of sexual freedom. Likewise she cannot be faulted for the pregnancy.
The question is whether she discharges her parental responsibility to educate her children regarding sex and its consequence.
She is reportedly believed in sex education for children at school and at home.
What is not clear is what she wants to teach. Abstinence is favored and contraception is scorned by large number of religious conservatives, a core base of Republican support.
This may have confused her or she may have deliberately chosen to be imprecise because abstinence is an off mainstream idea and would have alienated her from many Hillarite supporters who are likely to subscribed to the idea that contraception is a responsible sexual practice for all ages.
If Sarah teaches abstinence, she fails. If she teaches contraception, she also fails. It is therefore not know whether she teaches, and if so, what she teaches.
Americans deserve to know her view on this. Hillarite supporters and independents stay tune!
Sunday, September 7, 2008
The 2008 Hong Kong Legco Result
The result for the geographical constituencies is 19 seats for the Pan-Dem and 11 seats for the Pro-Establisment - a return to the distribution before the last Legco was dissolved.
Pro-Establishment:
DAB : 7 seats (7)
FTU: 2 seats (1)
others: 2 seats
Pan-Dem:
DP: 7 seats (7)
CP: 4 seats (3)
LSD: 3 seats (2)
Others: 5 seats
(numbers of seats formerly held in geographical constituencies)
The status quo is largey maintained and the biggest loser at this election is the pro-business Liberal Party which failed to retain the two seats they held in the geographical constituencies.
The presense of two other Pro-establishment candidates, one from from FTU (who won) and one self-proclaimed independent (who lost with respectable votes) in the two relevant constituencies, have diluted the Liberal Party's support.
This gives rise to the speculation that the pro-establishment camp (read pro-Beijing) has taken away their endorsement from the Liberal Party. Liberal Party maybe regarded by the Pro-establishment as not sufficiently reliable. It is still remembered that the Liberal Party ditched Tung's at the eleventh hour in opposing the article 23 legislation.
Civil Party won an extra seat in the Hong Island constituency at the expense of Democratic Party giving the party 4 geographical seats. Elsewhere, Civil Party has failed to make inroad. Civil Party was not formed in the last election and this makes the analysis difficult.
One of their candidate who retained the seat for Civil Party managed only 16.6% of votes compared to 19% in 2008. The party may have won more geographical constituencies but that is done at the expenses of their fellow Pan-Dem - the Democratic Party. Without a strong grassroot organization, reliance on celebrity barristers (all elected are barristers by porfession) alone may be problematic to the party in the future.
LSD, the more radical Pan-Dem saw an increase of support. Two of LSD winners won their seats with second highest number of vote in the multi-seat constituencies they contested. This is evident that there is a growing base of supporters for LSD who favor more vocal and sometimes theatrical opposition to the government amid an econimic downturn.
Despite a low turnout which generally favors the Pro-Establishment camp, Pan-Dem has reason to feel relieve with their accomplishment.
Post-note:
In a skewed electoral system where half of the seats are elected via functional constituencies. The Pro-Establishment camp continued to do well and have 35 seats. Pan-Dem retained only 4 functional seats and had only 23 seats in the new Legco. 2 functional seats are held by independents without affiliation.
The major party distribution In the new Legco ( functional seats in bracket)
DAB 10(3)
LP 7(7)
DP 8(1)
CP 5(1)
2008 Legco Election Turnout Rate
The turnout rate for Legco geographical constituencies in 2000 was 43.57 %and in 2004 was 55.64%.
The official turnout rate is 45.2%, 10% lower than 2004. What explains such a poor turnout?
Is the government to be blamed? The government cannot be faulted for not encouraging the voters to exercise their voting rights. Voters registration exercise and legco election are widely promoted.
Each voter receives voting informatio including a two-page brief on each candidates contesting in the constituency which the voter belong to. Through TV, radio, internet, traditional media, the HK government deploy celebrities in high exposure promotional campaigns.
The polling hours strecthing from 7.30 am to 10.30 pm is perhaps one of the longest in the region yet the turnout rate in HK legoc election remains disappointingly one of the lowest in the region.
Are voters's political apathy the reason? That maybe so. The 2008 Legco election did not have any heated political issue like the Article 23 legislation in the previous round and the disatisfaction with Donald's Tsang has not reached the acute level of discontent with Tung.
Further, I suspect a large number of middle class or aspiring middle class who voted for the Liberal Party didn't show up at the polling station this time as evident by the loss of all the Liberal Party candidates in the geographical constituencies.
It would appear that the 2004 turnout rate of 55.64% is the exception and 45% should be about the normal turnout rate for an election without contentious political issues.
The official turnout rate is 45.2%, 10% lower than 2004. What explains such a poor turnout?
Is the government to be blamed? The government cannot be faulted for not encouraging the voters to exercise their voting rights. Voters registration exercise and legco election are widely promoted.
Each voter receives voting informatio including a two-page brief on each candidates contesting in the constituency which the voter belong to. Through TV, radio, internet, traditional media, the HK government deploy celebrities in high exposure promotional campaigns.
The polling hours strecthing from 7.30 am to 10.30 pm is perhaps one of the longest in the region yet the turnout rate in HK legoc election remains disappointingly one of the lowest in the region.
Are voters's political apathy the reason? That maybe so. The 2008 Legco election did not have any heated political issue like the Article 23 legislation in the previous round and the disatisfaction with Donald's Tsang has not reached the acute level of discontent with Tung.
Further, I suspect a large number of middle class or aspiring middle class who voted for the Liberal Party didn't show up at the polling station this time as evident by the loss of all the Liberal Party candidates in the geographical constituencies.
It would appear that the 2004 turnout rate of 55.64% is the exception and 45% should be about the normal turnout rate for an election without contentious political issues.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Brunei and Malaysia
In the last few weeks, I was with the family on vacation first in Brunei and later in Malaysia. And one of the things that made the strongest impressions on me - albeit from a purely personal and anecdotal perspective - was the state of relations between the races.
In Malaysia, the state of racial relations are in a flux. The signs are mixed in the aftermath of the March 8 elections. On the plus side, electoral gains were made by the ostensibly multi-racial opposition coalition running on a largely non-racial message. I was there when the by-elections in Pematang Pauh took place and Datuk Seri Anwar ran a multi-racial campaign in a Malay majority constituency - and emerged victorious with increased majority.
On the otherhand, both the ruling and the opposition could not avoid the fact that all Malaysian political parties are stuck with a certain de facto racial identity, regardless of what the party constitution says. Within UNMO, hardliners and extremists keen to make a name for themselves are exploiting the political vacuum with impunity. When I was in Malaysia numerous such controversies were swirling around the national media. Outraged reactions from other races only serve to polorize the political environment. Having spent 2 years in a decidedly cosmopolitan (and astonishingly non-racial) environment that is NYC - and fresh from a few weeks in Brunei - I was struck how even casual conversations amongst family and friends often contain an uncomfortable number of sweeping statements about this and that race.
My observations while I was in Brunei though gave me pause for a different - and more hopeful and encouraging - reason. I'd be first to admit that it would not be possible or fair to compare the two countries; but what gave me pause was the scenes from Brunei's Chinese school when I picked up my daughters .
You see, my daughters spend the past 2 summers in Brunei and my mother arranged for them to attend the classes for the 10 weeks or so at the local Chinese school. It often amuses me how few people in Malaysia know that not only there are 8 Chinese schools in Brunei (3 of them up to middle school level), the Chung Hwa Middle School BSB with almost 4000 students from K to Pre-University level is the largest and one of the most respected schools in the country. The school is well-funded by the local Chinese community (as evident by a spanking new 5 storey complex) and progressive in its approach to education. Gone are the old fashioned 'Chinese-educated' mentality - and helped by an influx of talented teachers from mainland China - and the emphasis is now on a fully rounded education from music to wushu. Both my parents went to Chung Hwa, and so did my sister and I (up to Primary 6) and eventually so do both my daughters and all my sisters kids. Inevitably, there were the occasional politically-inspired challenges and I remember many as told to me by my late-father who was on the school board for more than 20 years; but overall I believe the state of Chinese education in Brunei has never been stronger.
All of that was very gratifying, but what gave me pause was the heartening racial diversity that I witnessed in that school. Malay parents and children no longer the oddities but they are now present in large numbers. In the steps waiting for the dismissal bell are ladies in tudong, guys military uniform, guys in haji caps, Philippinos, Indians and quite a few caucasian kids (I spotted one arriving in a British embassy car). Back in 2003, the principle told me the ratio of non-Chinese was 11% overall and 25% at kindergarten level ("we are slowly becoming an international school" she added). Today the numbers are probably even higher. I also sense that the idea of attending Ching Hwa is now mainstream, judging from the number of well-educated Malay elites I know who are sending their kids to Chung Hwa.
Back in the classrooms, the kids were yakking, studying, teasing and playing to one another in mix of Chinese and English. In them I see an easy and comfortable mingling that will continue as they grow older. As I see them, I realised that as my generation of Chinese grew up being comfortable with Malay friends and relations; now there is a growing generation of Malays who will be growing up being comfortable with Chinese. It is not only a matter of speaking and understanding the language, but I also see doors wide open into each other's cultures and worldview. In the same way that we are plugged into the global (and Western) language and culture, I see many of these youngsters being simulteneously plugged into their own culture, the global culture and the Chinese dimension.
I hope I was seeing the future and if so, I think I like what I am seeing.
In Malaysia, the state of racial relations are in a flux. The signs are mixed in the aftermath of the March 8 elections. On the plus side, electoral gains were made by the ostensibly multi-racial opposition coalition running on a largely non-racial message. I was there when the by-elections in Pematang Pauh took place and Datuk Seri Anwar ran a multi-racial campaign in a Malay majority constituency - and emerged victorious with increased majority.
On the otherhand, both the ruling and the opposition could not avoid the fact that all Malaysian political parties are stuck with a certain de facto racial identity, regardless of what the party constitution says. Within UNMO, hardliners and extremists keen to make a name for themselves are exploiting the political vacuum with impunity. When I was in Malaysia numerous such controversies were swirling around the national media. Outraged reactions from other races only serve to polorize the political environment. Having spent 2 years in a decidedly cosmopolitan (and astonishingly non-racial) environment that is NYC - and fresh from a few weeks in Brunei - I was struck how even casual conversations amongst family and friends often contain an uncomfortable number of sweeping statements about this and that race.
My observations while I was in Brunei though gave me pause for a different - and more hopeful and encouraging - reason. I'd be first to admit that it would not be possible or fair to compare the two countries; but what gave me pause was the scenes from Brunei's Chinese school when I picked up my daughters .
You see, my daughters spend the past 2 summers in Brunei and my mother arranged for them to attend the classes for the 10 weeks or so at the local Chinese school. It often amuses me how few people in Malaysia know that not only there are 8 Chinese schools in Brunei (3 of them up to middle school level), the Chung Hwa Middle School BSB with almost 4000 students from K to Pre-University level is the largest and one of the most respected schools in the country. The school is well-funded by the local Chinese community (as evident by a spanking new 5 storey complex) and progressive in its approach to education. Gone are the old fashioned 'Chinese-educated' mentality - and helped by an influx of talented teachers from mainland China - and the emphasis is now on a fully rounded education from music to wushu. Both my parents went to Chung Hwa, and so did my sister and I (up to Primary 6) and eventually so do both my daughters and all my sisters kids. Inevitably, there were the occasional politically-inspired challenges and I remember many as told to me by my late-father who was on the school board for more than 20 years; but overall I believe the state of Chinese education in Brunei has never been stronger.
All of that was very gratifying, but what gave me pause was the heartening racial diversity that I witnessed in that school. Malay parents and children no longer the oddities but they are now present in large numbers. In the steps waiting for the dismissal bell are ladies in tudong, guys military uniform, guys in haji caps, Philippinos, Indians and quite a few caucasian kids (I spotted one arriving in a British embassy car). Back in 2003, the principle told me the ratio of non-Chinese was 11% overall and 25% at kindergarten level ("we are slowly becoming an international school" she added). Today the numbers are probably even higher. I also sense that the idea of attending Ching Hwa is now mainstream, judging from the number of well-educated Malay elites I know who are sending their kids to Chung Hwa.
Back in the classrooms, the kids were yakking, studying, teasing and playing to one another in mix of Chinese and English. In them I see an easy and comfortable mingling that will continue as they grow older. As I see them, I realised that as my generation of Chinese grew up being comfortable with Malay friends and relations; now there is a growing generation of Malays who will be growing up being comfortable with Chinese. It is not only a matter of speaking and understanding the language, but I also see doors wide open into each other's cultures and worldview. In the same way that we are plugged into the global (and Western) language and culture, I see many of these youngsters being simulteneously plugged into their own culture, the global culture and the Chinese dimension.
I hope I was seeing the future and if so, I think I like what I am seeing.
Friday, September 5, 2008
America
Late on 28 Aug, we landed at Newark after a month in Asia. On the ride home, I had the chance to observe New York and of America again with a fresh(er) eye and inevitably, compare what I saw before me with the images still fresh in my mind of Malaysia, Brunei and (on TV) the incredible spectacle that was the Beijing Olympics. Granted, eastern New Jersey and the far west side of Manhattan are not among the best parts of America, the infrastructure were from the industrial age, the buildings were from the jazz age, the roads were uneven and bumpy, the streets somewhat unkempt; quite far from the slick modernity that one sees in Shanghai or Singapore or even some parts of KL. Somehow the 'new world' was beginning to look old and there is a new-new world that is gathering beyond the horizon waiting to make the 21st century its own.
Then I watched Obama accepting the presidential nomination and he reminded me what makes America great. And it has nothing to do with what America has - not the bricks and mortar, or its busineese, or its guns and stealth fighters, or its laws or government or even democracy. What makes America great is what it is. This is a place that still dares to have faith in its dream and trust that even the wildest dreams possible. This is a place that still believes in and tries its best to be its best self and to live out its dreams and ideals. I felt proud and privileged to be listening to him right here in the USA, as if by being here I could partake vicariously in the greatness of the spirit that made possible this moment - and the even bigger one on 20 January 2009 when he is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. I look forward to that great day for every national minority, every believer in meritocracy and every self-made man.
I have been wanting to post something on the state of the 2008 elections but events are changing (or obscuring) the dynamics too quickly in the past few days. But one thing has been consistent: regardless of the electioneering and the news cycle, if you listen to Obama you hear hope, optimism and an uplifting energy and if you hear the GOP you hear the same slash-and-burn message based on fear, faux-outrage and mean-spirited energy. In my book, light always fills out darkness, so unless the message changes there can only be one set of victor.
Then I watched Obama accepting the presidential nomination and he reminded me what makes America great. And it has nothing to do with what America has - not the bricks and mortar, or its busineese, or its guns and stealth fighters, or its laws or government or even democracy. What makes America great is what it is. This is a place that still dares to have faith in its dream and trust that even the wildest dreams possible. This is a place that still believes in and tries its best to be its best self and to live out its dreams and ideals. I felt proud and privileged to be listening to him right here in the USA, as if by being here I could partake vicariously in the greatness of the spirit that made possible this moment - and the even bigger one on 20 January 2009 when he is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. I look forward to that great day for every national minority, every believer in meritocracy and every self-made man.
I have been wanting to post something on the state of the 2008 elections but events are changing (or obscuring) the dynamics too quickly in the past few days. But one thing has been consistent: regardless of the electioneering and the news cycle, if you listen to Obama you hear hope, optimism and an uplifting energy and if you hear the GOP you hear the same slash-and-burn message based on fear, faux-outrage and mean-spirited energy. In my book, light always fills out darkness, so unless the message changes there can only be one set of victor.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
The 2008 HK Legco Election Campaign
Hong Kong Legislative Council (Legco) election is divided into 30 functional and 30 geographical constituencies. The combined electors for the functional constituencies are about 230,000 whereas the geographical constituencies represent 3.37 million registered votes.
The functional constituencies are frequently critized as the undemocratic component of the Legco and most of the political parties across the divide have agreed to phase them out. The only difference among them is the timing.
The Pan-Democrats aims at 2013 and the largest pro-government party, DAB, aims at 2018. DAB's stance is in line with the NPC's ruling in favor of direct election for the Chief Executive in 2017 and Legco after 2017.
As of today, the electoral system used for the geographical constituencies is the list system of proportionate representation. Hong Kong SAR is divided into 5 multi-seats contituencies contested by numerous parties, organization and individuals.
This system broadly produce a pretty representative result - 60% for the Pan-Democrat and 40% for Pro-Establishment. The functional constituencies are designed to preserve the business, professional and pro-Beijing interest.
This weekend Legco election see the largest contest in the geographical constituencies. This is in large part due to the highly fractious Pan-Democratic camp consisting of diverse groups of political parties and organizations held in common by attacking the Donald Tsang's administration and its allies in the Legco, described variously as the Loyalist, pro-Beijing or pro-establishment camp.
This camp until recently was dominated by the Democratic Party. A new upstart, the Civil Party, led by several leading barristers in the city, and backed by former Chief Secretary, Ansan Chan, has emerged as the strong contender to be the largest party for the Pan-Democratic Camp.
This camp includes smaller party like the more radical League of Social Democrat (LSD), ADPL, labour union and interest groups.
Having said that the camp is not an alliance. There are massive intra-camp strifles as seen from the current election campaign. This is a natural consequence of the electoral system. It is easier to pinch the support from among the pan-democratic and independent supporters rather than from the supporters of the opposing camp.
The Pro-Establishment camp is represented mainly by the traditional leftist DAB, pro-business Liberal Party and HKFTU, a leftist labour union. Generally, there is more cohesion within this camp.
The issues for the election as seen from the several debates and campaign leaflets are dominated by livelihood and economic issues. The Pan-Democrats are also taking shots at the Pro-Establishment camp on a string of administrative blunder by the Tsang's administration.
The trend of this Legco election points t0 the pan-democrat camp's favor because of the general economic downturn that affects the livelihood issues faced by the middle and the working class.
What is interesting about this election is that there are a lot more political debates held among the candidates, almost all of which are broadcast and accessible by youtube. The quality of the debates, as in any debate, ranges widely from one extreme to the other, depending on one's view. Over all, this is a healthy development of a political debate culture - one that is fair and open. Debate time, and hence the air time, is given equally to all the contested candidates, even though he/she maybe an independent with very small following.
There is also a general trend across the divide towards nominating younger candidates, who becomes politically active after 1997 handover. This is a welcome sign because the political scene has been dominated by the so-called party big brothers who crafted their political skills mostly
post 1989 and have been around over the last two decades.
The turnout rate in the 2004 Legco was 55.64% and 2000 was 43.57%. It is unlikely that the 2008 turnout rate will be higher than the 2004 which saw a massive turnout (by Hong Kong standard) to express disapproval against CH Tung's administration for promoting article 23, a national security legislative proposal, widely regarded as an encroachment of Hong Kong's liberty as well as his perceived incompetence in managing the post-SAR economy.
It is true that Donald Tsang's popular rating suffered a significant drop lately. This surely doesn't help the pro-establishment camp.
On the other hand, the sentiment among the Hong Kongers towards Beijing is far more positive than in 2004 - CEPA (Closer Economic Partnership Agreement) and other policies have helped Hong Kong's economy; China's victory in Olympic has rallied patriotism. Having said that, it is however unlikely that the pro-establishment camp will be rewarded by the voters simply because Hong Kongers have stronger identification with China.
The 2004 Legco election produces 18 seats for Pan-democrats and 12 seats for pro-establishment camp. A by-election last year gave Pan-democratic an additional seat vacated by the death of a pro-establishment Legco member.
My prediction is that the turnout rate will be lower than 2004. This should favor pro-establishment camp as they are better at mobilizing their supporters.
However the general election factors favor the pan-democrat. The likely result will not produce a landslide because of the proportionate representation system used.
My prediction is 20 for the pan-dem and 10 for the pro-establishment camp, a slight improvement for the pan-dem from the last election.
It is fun watching how pluralistic the HK Legco election. I am however not so interested in the eventual electoral result. Rather it is the way how it is played out that interest me.
The functional constituencies are frequently critized as the undemocratic component of the Legco and most of the political parties across the divide have agreed to phase them out. The only difference among them is the timing.
The Pan-Democrats aims at 2013 and the largest pro-government party, DAB, aims at 2018. DAB's stance is in line with the NPC's ruling in favor of direct election for the Chief Executive in 2017 and Legco after 2017.
As of today, the electoral system used for the geographical constituencies is the list system of proportionate representation. Hong Kong SAR is divided into 5 multi-seats contituencies contested by numerous parties, organization and individuals.
This system broadly produce a pretty representative result - 60% for the Pan-Democrat and 40% for Pro-Establishment. The functional constituencies are designed to preserve the business, professional and pro-Beijing interest.
This weekend Legco election see the largest contest in the geographical constituencies. This is in large part due to the highly fractious Pan-Democratic camp consisting of diverse groups of political parties and organizations held in common by attacking the Donald Tsang's administration and its allies in the Legco, described variously as the Loyalist, pro-Beijing or pro-establishment camp.
This camp until recently was dominated by the Democratic Party. A new upstart, the Civil Party, led by several leading barristers in the city, and backed by former Chief Secretary, Ansan Chan, has emerged as the strong contender to be the largest party for the Pan-Democratic Camp.
This camp includes smaller party like the more radical League of Social Democrat (LSD), ADPL, labour union and interest groups.
Having said that the camp is not an alliance. There are massive intra-camp strifles as seen from the current election campaign. This is a natural consequence of the electoral system. It is easier to pinch the support from among the pan-democratic and independent supporters rather than from the supporters of the opposing camp.
The Pro-Establishment camp is represented mainly by the traditional leftist DAB, pro-business Liberal Party and HKFTU, a leftist labour union. Generally, there is more cohesion within this camp.
The issues for the election as seen from the several debates and campaign leaflets are dominated by livelihood and economic issues. The Pan-Democrats are also taking shots at the Pro-Establishment camp on a string of administrative blunder by the Tsang's administration.
The trend of this Legco election points t0 the pan-democrat camp's favor because of the general economic downturn that affects the livelihood issues faced by the middle and the working class.
What is interesting about this election is that there are a lot more political debates held among the candidates, almost all of which are broadcast and accessible by youtube. The quality of the debates, as in any debate, ranges widely from one extreme to the other, depending on one's view. Over all, this is a healthy development of a political debate culture - one that is fair and open. Debate time, and hence the air time, is given equally to all the contested candidates, even though he/she maybe an independent with very small following.
There is also a general trend across the divide towards nominating younger candidates, who becomes politically active after 1997 handover. This is a welcome sign because the political scene has been dominated by the so-called party big brothers who crafted their political skills mostly
post 1989 and have been around over the last two decades.
The turnout rate in the 2004 Legco was 55.64% and 2000 was 43.57%. It is unlikely that the 2008 turnout rate will be higher than the 2004 which saw a massive turnout (by Hong Kong standard) to express disapproval against CH Tung's administration for promoting article 23, a national security legislative proposal, widely regarded as an encroachment of Hong Kong's liberty as well as his perceived incompetence in managing the post-SAR economy.
It is true that Donald Tsang's popular rating suffered a significant drop lately. This surely doesn't help the pro-establishment camp.
On the other hand, the sentiment among the Hong Kongers towards Beijing is far more positive than in 2004 - CEPA (Closer Economic Partnership Agreement) and other policies have helped Hong Kong's economy; China's victory in Olympic has rallied patriotism. Having said that, it is however unlikely that the pro-establishment camp will be rewarded by the voters simply because Hong Kongers have stronger identification with China.
The 2004 Legco election produces 18 seats for Pan-democrats and 12 seats for pro-establishment camp. A by-election last year gave Pan-democratic an additional seat vacated by the death of a pro-establishment Legco member.
My prediction is that the turnout rate will be lower than 2004. This should favor pro-establishment camp as they are better at mobilizing their supporters.
However the general election factors favor the pan-democrat. The likely result will not produce a landslide because of the proportionate representation system used.
My prediction is 20 for the pan-dem and 10 for the pro-establishment camp, a slight improvement for the pan-dem from the last election.
It is fun watching how pluralistic the HK Legco election. I am however not so interested in the eventual electoral result. Rather it is the way how it is played out that interest me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)