EDITORIAL/Time for Tang and Leung to compete with policy platforms
The one-month nomination period for the election of Hong Kong's fourth-term Chief Executive came to an end yesterday. Three runners have got sufficient nominations and been officially confirmed as candidates for the CE election. They are Henry Tang Ying-yen, Leung Chun-ying and Albert Ho Chun-yan. The list will be gazetted according to the law.
At the same time, campaigns for the CE election also officially kicked off. Polling will take place on 25 March. This means that in the upcoming three and a half weeks, all the three candidates must spare no efforts to solicit more supportive votes. Under effective rules, a nomination does not automatically translate into a vote. A nomination is signed while a vote is secret. Hence, it is possible that a candidate may not win all the votes from his nominators. He must try his best to secure votes from his nominators and solicit more from others.
As a matter of fact, the two candidates from the "pro-establishment" camp, Henry Tang Ying-yen and Leung Chun-ying have got 390 and 305 nominations respectively, each still having a long way to go to secure the minimal 601 votes, or more than half of the 1,200 members of the Election Committee, for winning out as required. They surely will have to spare no pains in next three and a half weeks to solicit and secure every possible supportive vote.
Then, what should the two candidates compete with？ "Exposure of scandals"？ "Smearing"？ Certainly not. If, in the next 20-odd days, attention would still be focused on follow-up negative news about these two candidates, then not only the 1,200 members of the Election Committee will feel greatly disappointed, but citizens will also shake their heads and sigh： Is such the standard and quality a future leader of Hong Kong society should have？
Therefore, it can be certain that as the election period begins following the conclusion of the nomination period, the two candidates from the "pro-establishment" camp must distance themselves from all "disputes" and return to the right track of election by competing with their policy platforms, ideals and capabilities. Likewise, the 1,200 members of the Election Committee must also try to "forget" the "scandals" exposed at the previous stage and make their re-evaluations of these two "pro-establishment" candidates based on their policy platforms, ideals and capabilities, so as to responsibly cast their votes on behalf of the seven million Hong Kong people.
Naturally, some people would argue that a policy platform is just something "on paper" full of "empty promises", which may never be honoured afterwards. Such saying has its reason. In fact, the operation of the SAR Government does not rely on the CE alone. To put into practice a good policy platform or ideals, a CE must have the help and cooperation of a good team. In the final analysis, however, a leader's quality, vision, capability and commitment could play a decisive role. Otherwise, there is no need to elect a CE in such a serious and solemn matter.
The policy platforms of the two "pro-establishment" candidates, as they are presented, are - generally speaking - quite detailed and comprehensive, covering issues concerning economic development, housing, education, medical care, social welfare and the influx of pregnant Mainland women to give birth in Hong Kong. But a careful examination will find they both are somewhat too broad and general. That is, all issues are touched but few sharp viewpoints and analyses are offered. Lacking are new thinking and creative ideas. Or, when there is some comparatively more innovative idea, there is short of elaboration and theoretical support - so much so that their feasibility appears dubious.
For instance, in his policy platform – We Are Tomorrow, Henry Tang proposes to grant a monthly allowance of $3,000 to each retired person whose cash asset is less than $180,000. For this, the government will spend $6 billion each year. This is not a big problem in times when the government coffers are "flooded" or full of money. However, in case there is a big depression in the outside economic environment, will Hong Kong as an externally-oriented economy still be able to sustain huge public expenditure？ Moreover, what is the difference between his proposal and a universal retirement protection scheme？
Likewise, Leung Chun-ying, in his policy platform – One Heart, One Vision for Hong Kong, proposes to build more public housing units so as to "shorten" the wait time for qualified citizens. But where to find the land needed？ How would this affect the private property market？ Clear explanations are lacking. Consequently, it is believed that the two candidates will further substantiate and improve their policy platforms.
01 March 2012
