HONG KONG'S FIRST TELEVISED CHIEF EXECUTIVE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 HONG KONG 000603

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EAP, EAP/CM, EAP/P

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/02/2032
TAGS: PGOV PREL PINR PHUM SOCI CH HK
SUBJECT: HONG KONG'S FIRST TELEVISED CHIEF EXECUTIVE
ELECTION DEBATE: LIVELY EXCHANGES BUT LITTLE IMPACT ON
SUPPORT LEVELS

REF: A. HONG KONG 0447

B. HONG KONG 0457

Classified By: E/P Section Chief Laurent Charbonnet; Reasons 1.4 (b, d)


1. (C) Summary: Hong Kong's first Chief Executive (CE)
debate, televised live on March 1, included some unexpectedly
lively exchanges over political reform, air pollution,
education, and poverty alleviation. Incumbent CE Donald
Tsang appeared restrained but also denigrated his opponent's

SIPDIS
lack of administrative and policy-making experience and
inability to communicate with mainland authorities.
Pan-democratic challenger Alan Leong criticized Tsang's
record over the past 18 months, observing that the CE's "most
decisive" moment had been the destruction of the Star Ferry
clock tower landmark. Leong also attempted to focus the
debate on the need for full implementation of universal
suffrage in Hong Kong, preferably in time for the 2012 CE and
Legislative Council (Legco) elections; in response, Tsang
again declined to offer a timetable for political reform.
Some Hong Kong newspapers observed that staging a televised
public debate set a good precedent for political
communication, although several of the major pro-Beijing
papers limited themselves to highly positive and harshly
negative descriptions of the performances of Tsang and Leong,
respectively. Early opinion polls indicate little change in
public views on the two candidates. End summary.


2. (C) Comment: Expectations going into this debate had been
low: there was to be no public participation, no direct
questioning between the candidates and, after all, the
outcome of this less-than-democratic selection process is
fore-ordained. Nevertheless, most Hong Kongers seemed
excited and engaged to be witnessing the first such public
debate in the first contested CE "election." It's too early
to say what the long-term effects here and in mainland China
will be, but most observers are taking some pride in the fact
that the debate even occurred, and proved that a competitive
process does not imply the end of rational and civil
discourse. End Comment.

Hong Kong's First CE Debate
--------------


3. (SBU) Hong Kong's first-ever public political debate,
televised live on March 1, featured the two principal
candidates, incumbent Chief Executive (CE) Donald Tsang and
his pan-democratic challenger, legislator Alan Leong.
Regardless of who was deemed to have won or lost the contest,
many observers agreed that the fact that it was held was
itself a major step forward in Hong Kong's political
development. The event included some unexpectedly lively
exchanges, despite the lack of any opportunity for public
participation and the inability of the candidates to
challenge each other directly. Nonetheless, Tsang and Leong
clashed over several issues, ranging from political reform to
air pollution, education, poverty alleviation, and other
socio-economic livelihood issues.


4. (C) While many thought Tsang appeared restrained, even
nervous, the incumbent still denigrated his opponent's lack
of administrative and policy-making experience and presumed
inability to communicate with mainland authorities. Leong,
on the other hand, criticized Tsang's record over the past 18
months, observing that the CE's "most decisive" moment had
been the destruction of the Star Ferry clock tower landmark
in late 2006. Veteran journalist and political commentator
Frank Ching told us on March 2 that he thought Leong had "won
on points," appearing at more ease, while Tsang was
handicapped by the need to defend his record as incumbent.


5. (SBU) As expected, Leong attempted to focus the debate on
the need for full implementation of universal suffrage in
Hong Kong, preferably in time for the 2012 CE and Legislative
Council (Legco) elections. Leong said he did not see any
difficulties for a committed CE to convince Beijing to allow
universal suffrage in 2012. In one of the testier moments of
the exchange, Leong remarked that "I don't see the
difficulties in convincing Beijing, unless the CE has no
commitment himself." Tsang retorted: "I wish you good luck
if that's what you are going to say to Beijing." Tsang, as
expected, also observed that Leong had thus far been unable
to forge a consensus even within the pan-democratic camp on a
strategy for democratization. He once again declined to
offer a timetable for political reform, noting his intention
to resolve this issue within the next five years.

Press: Predictably Divided

HONG KONG 00000603 002 OF 002


--------------


6. (SBU) The independent and pro-democracy Hong Kong papers,
including "Ming Pao," "Hong Kong Economic Journal," and
"Apple Daily" all commented favorably on the fact that a
televised public debate was held, saying it had set a good
precedent for political communication as part of an open and
competitive CE race. The three papers agreed that Leong had
out-performed Tsang in the debate.


7. (SBU) By contrast, as of March 2 the major pro-Beijing
papers had not commented on whether or not the debate was
useful, nor had they offered any insight into the central
government's impressions of the event. Rather, these papers
-- including the "Ta Kung Pao" (TKP),"Wen Wei Po" (WWP) and
"Hong Kong Commercial Daily" -- limited themselves to highly
positive and harshly negative descriptions of the
performances of Tsang and Leong, respectively. For example,
WWP observed that Tsang explained his program pragmatically,
while Leong just "made empty talk." Similarly, the TKP
claimed that Tsang had led the debate by explaining his
program in pragmatic terms, while Leong merely offered
challenging remarks and empty slogans.


8. (SBU) At least two papers -- the mass-market "Sun" and the
"Oriental Daily News" -- published negative comments on both
the debate format and the performance of the candidates. The
"Sun" criticized the election forum for "lacking new
thinking," while the "ODN" labeled the debate a "farce" and
claimed both candidates lacked charisma.

Polls: No Impact Yet
--------------


9. (C) According to Hong Kong's most respected poll,
conducted by Professor Robert Chung's Public Opinion Program
at Hong Kong University, the immediate impact of the March 1
debate was minimal. Incumbent CE Tsang's popularity rating
remained high at 65 percent, while that of challenger Leong
rose from 17 to 21 percent as he appeared to attract more of
the remaining uncommitted respondents. Similarly, about 68
percent of the poll's respondents said they supported Tsang's
candidacy, compared to 22 percent in favor of Leong, although
Leong may have registered some gains with younger and
working-class people. Chung plans to continue daily
assessments of public sentiment through the March 25
election. The next public debate is scheduled for March 15.
CUNNINGHAM