DEMOCRATS AND MEDIA CONDEMN, BUT ACADEMICS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 HONG KONG 000281 SIPDIS DEPT FOR EAP/CM; ALSO FOR DRL E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/11/2019 TAGS: PGOV PHUM HK CH SUBJECT: DEMOCRATS AND MEDIA CONDEMN, BUT ACADEMICS UNDERSTAND, DELAY IN HONG KONG CONSTITUTIONAL REFORMS REF: (A) HONG KONG 163 (B) HONG KONG 114 (C) HONG KONG OSC REPORT CPP20090123786001 Classified By: Consul General Joe Donovan for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (C) Summary: Chief Executive Donald Tsang's decision to delay consultation on constitutional reforms for the 2012 elections (ref b) continues to elicit mixed reviews. Opponents, including all 23 pan-democratic legislators and most independent media, condemned Tsang for breaking his promise to resolve the universal suffrage issue in his term of office, with the democrats demanding the government begin consultations immediately. Former Liberal Party Legislative and National People's Congress deputy turned born-again democrat Allen Lee believes Tsang acquiesced to Beijing. Pro-Beijing and some independent media supported Tsang. Two democratic-leaning scholars were unconcerned by the delay. Chinese University (CUHK) Professor Ma Ngok expected the delay, and does not see it as critical to reform. His CUHK colleague and research partner Ivan Choy believes Tsang made the politically smart choice, although he has now bet his political fortune on his ability to manage the economy. End summary. -------------- Democrats Condemn -------------- ¶2. (U) In a January 19 statement signed by all 23 of their legislators, the pan-democrats accused Chief Executive (CE) Donald Tsang of breaking a promise made in his election campaign to seek consensus and resolve the method by which Hong Kong would achieve elections for the CE and Legislative Council (LegCo) by universal suffrage. Conceding that the economy was a vital issue, they nonetheless argued progress could be made at the same time on consultations on 2012 electoral methods. Noting the expressed desire of the majority of Hong Kong's people to achieve universal suffrage at an early date, they demanded the government begin consultations immediately. Democratic Party Chair Albert Ho moved a resolution in LegCo February 11 condemning CE Tsang "for failing to honor his pledge made in the Policy Address by procrastinating public consultation on constitutional development, hence breaking faith with the people." The motion failed on a "party line" vote between the pan-democrats and pro-Beijing parties, although the normally pro-establishment "Professional Forum" abstained. ¶3. (C) Media commentator and former LegCo member and National People's Congress deputy Allen Lee told us he was "sure" the decision to delay consultations on the 2012 electoral reforms came from Beijing. Although CE Tsang made an explicit promise in his 2008 Policy Address, Lee contended Tsang did not argue with Beijing because Tsang is "not in charge" on this issue. Lee anticipated Tsang would halt work on all controversial issues: medical insurance, the future of broadcaster RTHK, and the minimum wage. (Note: Work on the minimum wage issue -- which involves protracted consultation among stakeholders and would not take effect before the hoped-for economic recovery -- continues, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung told the Consul General February 10. End note.) Lee believes discontent from this decision will result in the largest turnout for the annual July 1 march since 2004. -------------- Media Divided -------------- ¶4. (C) PRC-owned and -sympathetic media supported the decision to delay consultations, while independent media including the South China Morning Post (SCMP),Ming Pao, Apple Daily and the Hong Kong Economic Journal questioned the logic. Pro-Beijing Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po both lent editorial support to the decision, as did working-class Sing Pao and Hong Kong Daily. (Note: In what may have been a trial balloon, Wen Wei Po had called for the delay prior to Tsang's decision. End Note.) Among independent media, only center-left Sing Tao and its English-language counterpart the Standard argued the decision was reasonable. The Standard argued that debate on constitutional reform would use too much of LegCo's time to allow work on the economy. In addition, Basic Law Committee Member Lau Nai-keung argued in his SCMP column that when the consultation starts is irrelevant as long as the systems are in place for the 2012 elections. ¶5. (C) Centrist Ming Pao dismissed the idea that economic conditions in the fourth quarter would be sufficiently better for debate on constitutional reforms as "utterly groundless." HONG KONG 00000281 002 OF 002 SCMP's editorial page walked an unsteady middle line, acknowledging that the economy was the priority but contending the consultations were "best carried out sooner rather than later." Civic Exchange CEO Christine Loh used her SCMP column both to condemn the Tsang administration's inability to "multitask" and to argue the Mainland had orchestrated the delay. -------------- Democratic Academics Accept -------------- ¶6. (C) Chinese University (CUHK) academics Ma Ngok and Ivan Choy, both of whom identify themselves with the pan-democrats, expressed varying degrees of acceptance of the government's decision. Ma's attitude was generally complacent: he had expected the delay, and believed that, even if consultations began only in the fourth quarter of the year, there was still sufficient time to have new electoral systems in place in time for 2012. Even had the debate started as scheduled, Ma doubted the democrats could have "generated much momentum" on the issue, since the general public was worried more about the economy. Asked if the pan-democrats might float their own reform plan, Ma said no one in the pan-democratic camp could publicly abandon their call for universal suffrage in 2012 (which has been ruled out by the National People's Congress Standing Committee's December 2007 decision). Any compromise proposal would cause a divisive internal quarrel within the bloc. Thus, for unity's sake, they are forced to wait to react to the government's proposal, which Ma feels gives them less bargaining power in the debate. Given that the July 1 march has been co-opted by a number of unrelated causes in the past, Ma expects this year's June 4 commemorations to be the more accurate barometer of public support for democracy. ¶7. (C) Admitting he was ideologically with the democrats, Ivan Choy nonetheless conceded that, were he CE Tsang's political advisor, he also would have suggested Tsang delay consultations on 2012 reforms. Tsang's own polls show support for the decision (Choy argues Tsang draws most support from the lower middle and working classes) and his popularity has stabilized. Tsang is making a calculated bet, hoping his widely-acknowledged expertise in economic matters will allow him to show the public he is handling the financial crisis effectively. While Choy admits there may be more democracy advocates on the street July 1, Tsang's hope is likely that there would be fewer activists pressing livelihood causes, keeping overall numbers down. (Note: While Article 23 national security legislation was the catalyst for the first July 1 march in 2003, most people believe the march would not have massed 500,000 people absent that year's economic downturn and the Tung administration's mishandling of SARS. End note.) DONOVAN