MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): President, Members of this Council returned by functional constituencies (FCs) provide immense positive energy to resist the non-cooperation movement, thereby enabling the smooth governance of the Government. The attendance rate of many FC Members is even higher than that of Members returned through direct elections. Apart from caring for the welfare of low-income earners and supporting the relevant initiatives, they also support the development of more land sites to genuinely resolve the problem of high property prices in Hong Kong. Moreover, FC Members have actively promoted Hong Kong’s economic development, so that young people can have a better future and more opportunities to gain upward mobility and the Government can have more fiscal surpluses to improve people’s livelihood, including the retirement arrangements of retirees without the means. Hence, Hong Kong absolutely needs FC Members who do real work.
Members of the opposition camp always do not mean what they say. They say one thing but do another, and refuse to yield a single step. Being incapable of independent thinking, they tend to adopt a bundling tactic. Members of the opposition camp have been very consistent in that they have all along only accepted proposals that can reach the goal in one step. This applies to constitutional development and changes to FCs. Nonetheless, under “one country, two systems”, and given the absence of mutual trust between the Central Authorities and the opposition camp, how can the policies of Hong Kong and the Central Authorities be resolved in one step? Although the constitutional reform proposal is far from ideal, taking the first step forward would open up the door to universal suffrage. Once the door is open, it would be increasingly difficult to close it again, and the door will only open wider and wider.
All the Members of the Legislative Council could be elected by universal suffrage in 2020 if the constitutional reform proposal was passed. No matter how the opposition camp has played up the numbers, the public know very clearly that 28 Members have voted against the constitutional reform proposal and hence, all the Members of the Legislative Council will not be elected by universal suffrage in 2020. Some Members always claim that they want to broaden the electoral base of FCs, but when the Insurance FC proposed to replace corporate votes with director’s votes so that its electoral base would be expanded from the existing 130 insurance companies to insurance intermediaries, Members of the opposition camp said that they would not accept these piece-meal fixes and insist that FCs be abolished. They have consistently maintained the stance of not practicing what they preach, and they should not be trusted at all.
Last but not least, I would like to talk about some favourite pet phrases of the opposition camp. They often claim that FC Members were elected by zero vote, which is actually quite ridiculous. Some candidates of certain FCs were returned uncontested because they have been regarded as doing a good job by their industries and hence, nobody came forward to challenge them. Hence, instead of saying that they were elected by zero vote, it would be more appropriate to say that they were elected by unanimous votes. Regrettably, some members of the public have been misled and often claim wrongly that some FC Members were elected by zero vote. How come Members can get elected by zero vote in Hong Kong?
Obviously Hong Kong is a relatively balanced society. Some people prefer the welfare state, while some people are more concerned about the economy. It should have been beneficial for society to achieve balanced development so that every person can do what he wants. If directly elected Members want to provide more social benefits in Hong Kong, FC Members would give their support because I sincerely believe that employees should have the right to enjoy a balanced work life, and employers have the responsibility of looking after their employees. In this regard, I definitely will not have any dissenting views. But Members returned through direct elections must also take the time and make the effort to show their interest and propose measures to drive economic development so that the Government will have the means to give cash handouts. This is something we must understand.
What good will constant disruption bring to Hong Kong? I am not scared at all to debate with other Members. In the current-term Legislative Council, FC Members have attended the most meetings, and they return to the Chamber the soonest whenever the quorum bell is ringing. FC Members express views for the benefit of Hong Kong; they are also the ones who spare no effort to fight against the filibustering Members. FC Members have been discredited all along, which is absolutely unfair.
Of course, the system can be improved so that Members who genuinely want to help members of the public can be elected. Similarly, though the system of direct election is good, if the Members elected muddle along without making contribution and oppose everything during their tenure of over 10 years, what benefit will they bring to society? Hence, while the system is important, human factor cannot be underestimated. Having a good system does not mean the best people can get elected. I hope we be people oriented and consider how to improve the system so that the best people can get elected to genuinely work for Hong Kong. This will truly be a blessing for Hong Kong. Thank you, President.