www射-国产免费一级-欧美福利-亚洲成人福利-成人一区在线观看-亚州成人

Just who is polarizing the Hong Kong SAR?

Updated: 2014-08-13 07:24

By Lau Nai-keung(HK Edition)

  Print Mail Large Medium  Small 分享按鈕 0

Just who is polarizing the Hong Kong SAR?

Executive Council (ExCo) Convener Lam Woon-kwong and fellow member Anna Wu Hung-yuk have decided not to sign the anti-"Occupy Central" petition. In doing so, they are breaking ranks with other members of the government's top advisory body. Their decision follows concerted efforts by the government to highlight the illegality and potential harm of the proposed "Occupy Central" campaign.

Other non-official members of ExCo have all backed the signature campaign. As of Aug 8, at least 25 political appointees to the government have either signed or said they would sign a petition opposing "Occupy".

Lam Woon-kwong's previous comments condemning "Occupy" includes a commentary headlined, "Occupy Central is naive to think its disruptive threat will work" published in the South China Morning Post on Aug 8. Lam told reporters that, "I don't see the need to sign up to a campaign to repeat (my views)." But is Lam really firmly against "Occupy"?

"Repeated polls by respectable agencies show that public support for 'Occupy' has never gone past the one-quarter mark. That is a clear sign that while most of us do want to participate in an open and fair election for the next Chief Executive, the great majority does not consider the threat of civil disobedience wise or acceptable," Lam wrote in the Post. He made it sounds like an "open and fair election for the next Chief Executive" is not going to happen. If the dissidents can find a "wise and acceptable" way to oppose the government, he will give it his full support.

The sub-head of his article says: "Disruptive tactics don't speak for all Hongkongers, even if we agree with the goal." What goal is Lam talking about? "International standards" or "true democracy"? It is alarming that the Executive Council convener shares the same goal with the organizers of "Occupy".

He wrote that consensus on reform could not be achieved by threats and posturing and said "Occupy" was "naive to threaten the central government". He cited polls showing limited support for the "Occupy" campaign.

Anna Wu also said she would not sign any petition that "dealt with political positions". "I feel that as long as I am in ExCo and particularly during this period, I should keep an open mind," Wu added. Is it just me, or did she say her colleagues who signed the petition have an incorrect understanding of the proper role of an ExCo member and are narrow-minded?

In the signature campaign organized by the Alliance for Peace and Democracy, participants are asked to support four simple statements: I oppose violence. I oppose "Occupy Central". I support peace for Hong Kong. I support democracy for Hong Kong. (If you also want to sign, please visit http://www.sign4peacedemocracy.hk.)

What is so political about these statements? In keeping an "open mind", is Wu suggesting violence is perhaps also worth considering?

Lam and Wu represent a fraction within the government, who believe that meeting the dissidents head-on will harm the social fabric of Hong Kong. According to them, no matter how ridiculous and unreasonable the dissidents are, we must not retaliate with similar tactics. The government can only use the same old tricks that have already proven ineffective, such as presenting and answering questions in the Legislative Council. If the executive branch tries to reach out to people directly, such as using Facebook and blogs, or town hall meetings, it is considered "polarizing society". In essence, these "moderates" want to stop the government from taking the appropriate actions to uphold the rule of law in Hong Kong.

Article 55 of the Basic Law says "members of the Executive Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be appointed by the Chief Executive from among the principal officials of the executive authorities, members of the Legislative Council and public figures. Their appointment or removal shall be decided by the Chief Executive."

In other words, they serve at the pleasure of the CE, and do not have the luxury to pretend they are independent from the CE. Now that Leung Chun-ying has openly indicated he will sign to support the anti-"Occupy Central" signature campaign, why are Lam and Wu making such unhelpful comments?

While it is unclear whether supporting the signature campaign will further "polarize" society or not, the conduct and comments of Lam and Wu have clearly polarized the government.

The author is a veteran current affairs commentator.

(HK Edition 08/13/2014 page9)

主站蜘蛛池模板: 亚洲精品一区二区三区福利 | 中文字幕亚洲精品久久 | 久久精品国产在爱久久 | 在线 | 一区二区三区四区 | 日本b站一卡二不卡 | 国产成人精品视频频 | 在线观看久草视频 | 免费一级做a爰片久久毛片 免费一级做a爰片性色毛片 | 欧美另类激情 | 国产看午夜精品理论片 | 国产91精品露脸国语对白 | 午夜性爽快免费视频播放 | 国产午夜免费视频 | 成人亚洲在线 | 香港经典a毛片免费观看看 香港经典a毛片免费观看爽爽影院 | 美女黄页网| a毛片全部免费播放 | 国产精品视频第一区二区三区 | 在线视频 中文字幕 | 国产一区免费观看 | 久久久久亚洲国产 | 欧美日韩国产片 | 一级毛片免费观看 | 在线观看亚洲免费 | 中国成人免费视频 | 国产成人综合手机在线播放 | 亚洲人成高清毛片 | 欧美精品另类hdvideo | 国产a一级 | 视频一区中文字幕 | 欧美在线视频看看 | 午夜大片免费男女爽爽影院久久 | 久草新在线观看 | 在线中文字幕一区 | 国产欧美久久久精品 | 2020精品极品国产色在线观看 | 日本一区二区三区四区五区 | 国产精品亚洲精品影院 | 精品久久国产老人久久综合 | 永久免费91桃色福利 | 色碰碰 |