To many people, the vote is the hallmark of a government’s legitimacy. I understand that this is a common narrative among political scientists in the West. However, given human weaknesses, this route to determine a government’s legitimacy is fraught with problems. Simply put, the popular vote is not a surer way to elect a strong and enlightened leadership.
Sunday’s LegCo election was not one that determines who is going to govern. According to the Basic Law, the chief executive is elected by the Election Committee and then appointed by the Central People’s Government. The Basic Law also promises transition to universal suffrage for election of the chief executive. The prerequisite is “in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress”. Even at the final stage of electoral reform, nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee is still necessary; and the government must still earn its legitimacy by effectively serving the best interests of the people with effective public governance.
Sunday’s election produced a new batch of legislators who will contribute to Hong Kong’s effective public governance with their impact on policy making. They must enact laws that protect public safety and health; further Hong Kong’s economic development; provide an adequate social safety net so the needs of disadvantaged people can be taken care of; fight corruption and crime; ensure industrial and occupational safety; minimize fire hazards; and above all, build an environment in which Hong Kong people will thrive in peace and prosperity. Hong Kong is densely populated and sorely needs caring and seasoned legislators who will help the SAR government to build a better future for all of us.
As a voter, I would not support someone who makes promises to serve constituents’ interests without considering the cost and particularly the sustainability of the proposed policies. Too many governments around the world these days are running fiscal deficits that just cannot be sustained. Too many governments make policies that do not contribute to the public interest over the long run. Legislators carry a huge price tag, and if they are to deliver, they must work hard.
Today, we have 90 members in the LegCo. This means that in a LegCo meeting not many legislators will have the chance to speak. If each were to spend 10 minutes speaking, even excluding the time used by government officials, a meeting would last 15 hours. This, however, is not an excuse to be a silent observer. They must contribute policy ideas and analyses that help the executive perform better. If these good ideas cannot be discussed in the council chamber, they should still voice their ideas openly through the press or through meetings with the policy bureau secretaries.
Voters, too, must do their homework year-round. Voters will not know how to vote without doing their homework. Simply asking voters to exercise their voting rights just days before the voting day is, realistically, not helpful to the cause of good governance.
Typically, turnout will rise when the stakes are high and when there are diametrically conflicting interest groups contending for their private interests. In principle, turnout tends to be lower when voters know little about the contenders and when there are few controversial issues that matter a lot to different interests.
As a matter of fact, I do not quite understand the logic of geographic elections of LegCo members. If the idea is that each geographic area should have legislators in proportion to its population, we should allow all residents to vote on the full list of contenders. One might know a contender from another geographical area to be a promising legislator and might want to elect him or her. Under the present arrangement, this is not possible.
I would think that if all voters for the geographical constituencies could vote for any contender regardless of their geographic areas, the turnout rate might be raised further, and the chances of electing competent legislators would be higher.
Finally, I would like to share my “LIFE” formula for good public governance with readers. All public officials and legislators must first care for the well-being of Hong Kong people (Love). They must also have Insight or Wisdom in making laws and in policy making in general. This means they must see the big picture and weigh social costs against social benefits before any policy decision. They must have the Fortitude to work hard and to struggle against all odds to serve Hong Kong and the motherland. They must also be fully Engaged in their work with good focus and strong sense of purpose.
The author is an honorary research fellow at the Pan Sutong Shanghai-Hong Kong Economic Policy Research Institute, Lingnan University, and an adjunct professor at the Academy for Applied Policy Studies and Education Futures, the Education University of Hong Kong.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
