Occupy Central
Occupy Central is a civil disobedience movement which began in Hong Kong on September 28, 2014. It calls on thousands of protesters to block roads and paralyse Hong Kong's financial district if the Beijing and Hong Kong governments do not agree to implement universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017 and the Legislative Council elections in 2020 according to "international standards." The movement was initiated by Benny Tai Yiu-ting (戴耀廷), an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, in January 2013.
Umbrella Movement
The Umbrella Movement (Chinese: 雨傘運動; pinyin: yǔsǎn yùndòng) is a loose political movement that was created spontaneously during the Hong Kong protests of 2014. Its name derives from the recognition of the umbrella as a symbol of defiance and resistance against the Hong Kong government, and the united grass-roots objection to the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) of 31 August.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
Occupy Central site in an area surrounding the Legislative Council and Central Government Offices at Tamar were cleared 22-06-2015.
Hong Kong reform vote
The Hong Kong government’s political reform proposal for how the city elects its leader by universal suffrage for the first time in 2017 is based on a strict framework set by Beijing. The plan limits the number of candidates to two or three and requires them to win majority support from a 1,200 strong nominating committee. Arguing that this does not constitute genuine universal suffrage, pan-democratic lawmakers have vowed to reject the package, while pro-democracy groups have protested. The government’s resolution was to be put to a vote by the 70-member Legislative Council in June 2015, requiring a two-thirds majority to be passed.
POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 211
POST REFORM VOTE：DAY 26
POST REFORM VOTE：DAY 26
Full coverage of the day’s events on 14-07
Why do Hong Kongers want to dissociate with China?
A lot of my expats friends fail to grasp the Hong Kongers' negative sentiment against the Chinese, and fewer of them truly understand the meaning of the nativist movement.
This is because they live in a completely different socio-economic environment.
People living in Central cannot see how taxi drivers selectively operate in Northern Districts, expats who send their children to International schools would have little problem in securing a place in the local primary school. These might sound trivial, but the essence of the problem is a lot less trivial.
To put it simply, Hong Kongers are under-represented. I am not talking about the super-rich, but Hong Kongers belonging to the middle and lower class, who were born in Hong Kong and consider Hong Kong their home. Patience is wearing thin after 150 years of colonial government, and another 18 years of de-facto colonisation. Hong Kongers have virtually no representation in the negotiations of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. The bulk of Hong Kongers have no representation in the drafting of the Basic Law, when the meagre two legislators (out of 59) representing progressive Hong Kongers were forced to quit midway due to irreconcilable differences.
The transfer of power from Britain to China in 1997 was conducted behind a backdrop of power brokerage of big nations. Singapore, on the other hand, at least had a referendum vote on merging with Malaysia in 1963. The Singaporeans also gave consent towards drafting the constitution of the Malaysian federation. Hong Kong never had the opportunity to give mandate, and thence the seeds of discontent were sewed.
From this point, things can only go worse. Being predominantly raised in a completely different set of cultural values, the majority of the Hong Kongers are excluded from the establishment. The Hong Kong government has no political mandate. They are supported by the alliance of Beijing and Hong Kong tycoons, and therefore the government has no political capital to address public policies that would hurt the tycoons. This period is most apparent in 2003-2010, when “the Land and the ruling class” became a bestseller in Hong Kong and “地產霸權” (loosely translated as “property developer hegemony”) became a buzzword.
Desperate trying to cling onto power and attempting to gain popular support, Beijing naturally turn to the 55,000 immigrants who arrive to Hong Kong from China per annum. These are people whom were brought up in a completely different social-political background, and they are straining the public services in Hong Kong. I once talked to a retired government official from the Social Welfare Department in Hong Kong and he laments, “the projection figures are all there, the sums do not add up. The pressure on Hong Kong’s social welfare system will only worsen in the future. The Administrative Officers in government should all know about this, but there is silence on this topic at the very top.” It is therefore inherent in the system for the government wanting to encourage social tension, and the natural reaction of an average Hong Konger would be to resist- and this is nativism in a nutshell. This is not a problem of the same scale that EU countries face in light of EU super-sovereignty. Firstly, China is disproportionately bigger than Hong Kong. Secondly, Beijing inherits from a political heritage of a Leninist ideology, that actively encourages the use of the state machine to crush everything obstructing its path.
With talks of devolution in European countries and the future of Hong Kong murky. I end with the quote of former Australian Prime Minister Robert Menzies warning Britain’s decision to join the ECC, “I run a federation, I know how federations work. They are either centripetal, in which case the states came closer and closer together as in Australians, or they were centrifugal, with states moving further and further apart until they eventually broke away. They are never static. There was no other dynamic at work in such groupings.”
And the bell tolls for thee.
Leung Chun-ying managed to humiliate his ostensible allies Jasper Tsang (left) and Carrie Lam on the same day. Photos: RTHK, Bloomberg
Jasper Tsang, Carrie Lam lose face at hands of CY Leung
During question period in the Legislative Council last week, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying was subjected to constant heckling from the opposition benches.
Albert Chan Wai-yip of People Power, Leung Kwok-hung of the League of Social Democrats and independent lawmaker Wong Yuk-man kept yelling at him from their seats.
Leung became so irritated that he asked Legco president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing to enforce the chamber’s rules of procedure by disciplining them.
After a moment of hesitation, Tsang, rather reluctantly it seemed, told Chan and his colleagues to behave.
Feeling indignant at Leung’s arrogant and bossy attitude, other pan-democratic legislators in the chamber immediately raised the question whether it was appropriate for the chief executive to give orders to the Legco president during a formal meeting of the legislature.
However, members of the pro-establishment camp, apparently still haunted by the bungled walkout several weeks ago that led to the resounding defeat of the government’s electoral reform proposal, were quick to rush to the defense of their boss.
Among them, Ann Chiang Lai-wan and Ip Kwok-him of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, Wong Kwok-kin of the Federation of Trade Unions and Ma Fung-kwok, who represents the sports, performing arts and cultural sector, urged Tsang one after another to get tough with the three rebellious lawmakers.
Tsang was outraged by their demand.
He responded angrily that he didn’t need to be told what to do and asked the lawmakers whether they had already performed enough in front of the television cameras.
Many in the mainstream media believe the reason Tsang suddenly lost his temper was probably because he was feeling humiliated by the fact that his pro-establishment colleagues were questioning his ability to maintain order inside the chamber in front of the chief executive, which made him look incompetent as the president of Legco.
Besides, it has become an open secret that there is personal animosity between Tsang and Leung, and Tsang was simply contemptuous of those who were openly trying to kiss up to the chief executive.
Leung has recently stated on different occasions that in the post-reform-vote era, his administration will stay focused on livelihood and economic issues.
As there are a lot of pressing issues facing our society, such as insufficient protection for labor, the absence of a universal retirement protection scheme, a healthcare system that is already stretched to the limit and even the sustainability of our financial system, Hongkongers are holding their breath to see how the government is going to deliver on its promise.
Unfortunately, to everyone’s disappointment, it seems what is in the administration’s pipeline is the complete opposite of what we are expecting.
During Thursday’s question period, in what appeared to be a publicity stunt for the government in collaboration with the DAB, legislator and executive councillor Starry Lee Wai-king, the party’s chairman, began by bragging that her party had found 70 “public hygiene black spots” across the city and asked Leung what he was going to do about that.
It seems the only aim of her question was to set the stage for the chief executive to proudly announce his latest big policy initiative: the Clean Hong Kong Campaign 2015, which will begin next month, spearheaded by Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor.
So it turned out that even though there are a lot of social and economic problems waiting to be dealt with urgently in our city, and the general public is eagerly looking forward to remedies for them, all our government is concerned about is cleaning up the trash on our streets.
As the second-in-command of the Hong Kong government, Lam has been kept busy in the past three years taking care of one big project after another, such as the Community Care Fund, the population policy initiative and the “pocket it first” electoral reform proposal, not to mention playing “secretary nanny” and cleaning up the numerous messes left behind by her fellow top officials.
Despite her tireless efforts to keep the government functioning against the odds for the past few years, it is really sad and ironic that the reward for her steadfast service is the position of captain of the cleaning squad.
As the old Chinese saying goes, once there are no more birds to hunt, the bow will be put away.
It seems this ancient rule of politics still applies to modern-day Hong Kong.
Coconuts
CY Leung berates media for ‘spreading rumours’ amid speculation he will step down
Some media “have gotten used to spreading rumours,” Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying said on Monday amid speculation that the central government will force him to step down.
He added that readers would be able to judge whether the reports are true.
Leung made the comments during an unannounced visit to Beijing during which he met the chairman of the Chinese legislature Zhang Dejiang. Leung said: “Chairman [Zhang] has said [he] would continue to firmly support me and the Hong Kong government.”
Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying speaking to media in Beijing. Photo: GovHK
Apple Daily reported last Friday that many local politicians believed Leung would step down in January. It claimed that the decision was made as Beijing wanted to ease the existing tension in society and help pro-Beijing legislators take extra seats in the election next year.
When Leung was asked whether he would stand for re-election, he added: “If there are opportunities, I will definitely do my best to serve Hong Kong society.”
Last Saturday, Leung said that he did not have any plans with regards to whether he would run for a second term.
Leung Chun-ying speaking on Commercial Radio on July 11. Photo: GovHK
Xinhua News Agency released a report on Monday stating that Leung had urged the opposition to abandon their “non-cooperative movements.” It also reported that Leung wished to work on improving relations between the executive and the legislature.
However, the state-run media outlet did not report on Leung’s unannounced meeting with Zhang on Monday.
Emily Lau Wai-hing, chair of the Democratic Party, said she will not interpret Leung’s chances of re-election based solely on his comments at the press conference. She told Ming Pao: “We cannot predict what would happen in mainland China. Even if the [chief executive] is replaced tomorrow, he can still be praised today.” Lau said that Leung’s potential re-election is no secret, but Beijing is the final decision maker.
Academic Ma Ngok said that the Central Government would make it more obvious if they intended to show support for Leung. The government and public administration professor said that there should “at least be a photography session for the media.” Ma added the arrangement was “unreasonable” this time.
Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, a Hong Kong delegate to the National People’s Congress, said the rumour was “not trustworthy.” She added that she did not believe the central government would replace the chief executive because he is unpopular in Hong Kong.
沒有留言:
張貼留言