|
Following is a question by Dr Hon Kwok Ka-ki and a reply by the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr Raymond Tam, in the Legislative Council today (January 21):
Question:
On the 6th of this month, the Government published the Report on the Recent Community and Political Situation in Hong Kong (the Report). Paragraph 1.10 of the Report mentions that the Government decided to submit, outside the "Five-step Process" of constitutional development, the Report to the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, to reflect objectively and truthfully events related to constitutional development from August 31 to December 15 last year as well as the opinions and aspirations expressed by different sectors of the community. Paragraph 1.14, however, mentions that the Report is a collection of materials in the public domain, and the authorities have not undertaken any independent investigation to verify the accuracy of such materials. Some members of the public have criticised that the materials collected in the Report are incomprehensive and the summary of certain events lacks objectivity. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the criteria based on which the authorities selected materials in the public domain for inclusion in the Report, and the reasons why some important events of public concern were omitted from the Report, such as the removal of Hon James Tien Pei-chun from the Twelfth National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference as he had called for the Chief Executive (CE) to consider resignation;
(2) whether the authorities had, in preparing the summary of important events in Chapter Two of the Report, made reference to media reports and public comments on the events, particularly about the incident of the Lung Wo Road confrontations mentioned in paragraph 2.25; if so, of the details; as the authorities have indicated that, in collecting the materials, they did not undertake any independent investigation to verify the accuracy of such materials, how the authorities ensure the authenticity of the materials, and that the Report can truthfully reflect public sentiment; and
(3) whether it was on the basis of specific justifications and analysis outcome that the authorities made the concluding remarks in paragraph 4.01 of the Report (i.e. it is the common aspiration of the Central Authorities, the HKSAR Government, and the people of Hong Kong to implement universal suffrage for the CE election in 2017 in Hong Kong as scheduled and strictly in accordance with the Basic Law and the relevant Interpretation and Decisions of the NPCSC); if so, of the details; if not, whether the above concluding remarks merely reflect the stance of the Government?
Reply:
President,
Hong Kong is a pluralistic society. Constitutional development has been an extremely controversial issue for years, and different sectors of the community also hold different stances and views on the issue.
On August 31, 2014, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) adopted the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Issues Relating to the Selection of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region by Universal Suffrage and on the Method for Forming the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the Year 2016 (Decision), formally determining that universal suffrage for the Chief Executive (CE) election through "one person, one vote" could be implemented starting from 2017. However, there are still quite divergent opinions in different sectors of the community regarding the contents of the Decision and how to implement universal suffrage for the CE election in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Basic Law.
The unlawful occupy movement which took place between the end of September and December 15, 2014 aroused widespread concern in the community. During this period, there were suggestions that the HKSAR Government could reflect to the Central Authorities the opinions of different sectors of the community on the Decision and on constitutional development since the NPCSC adopted the Decision in the end of August 2014. After carefully considering the constitutional arrangements and the situation then in the HKSAR, the HKSAR Government decided to, outside the "Five-step Process" of constitutional development, submit the "Report on the Recent Community and Political Situation in Hong Kong" (Report) to the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council by the Task Force on Constitutional Development, to reflect objectively and truthfully events in Hong Kong related to constitutional development from August 31 to December 15 last year, and the opinions and aspirations expressed by different sectors of the community. The Report was submitted on January 6, 2015, and was published on the same day.
Our reply to the specific questions raised by Dr Hon Kwok is as follows.
(1) The Report is based on events, statements, and opinion polls related to constitutional development from August 31 to December 15 last year obtained from public sources by the Government, and reflects objectively and truthfully the opinions and aspirations expressed by different sectors of the community. The Report includes: (1) events related to constitutional development during the report period; (2) relevant statements made by various groups; and (3) relevant opinion polls conducted by various organisations. The Report has objectively and truthfully reflected the different opinions and aspirations toward constitutional development expressed by different sectors of the community.
(2) As mentioned in the first part of the reply, the Report is compiled based on events, statements, and opinion polls related to constitutional development that the Government obtained from public sources, and has covered as far as possible different kinds of information collected by the Government, including the relevant reports from the media. As the Report is a collection of materials in the public domain, the Government did not conduct separately any independent investigation to verify the accuracy of such materials. As we have stated explicitly in Chapter One of the Report, in relation to the statements made by various groups and relevant opinion polls included in the Annexes and Appendices to the Report, the version published by the relevant organisations shall prevail in case of any doubt or discrepancy.
(3) In addition, Chapter One of the Report has clearly stated that the HKSAR Government acknowledges that Hong Kong is a pluralistic society, and that different groups and individuals have different opinions toward constitutional development. After the Decision was adopted, there were still quite divergent opinions in the society regarding how to implement universal suffrage for the CE election in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Basic Law. We understand that all along, constitutional development has been an extremely controversial issue. In fact, the Report has endeavoured to reflect truthfully the different opinions and aspirations related to constitutional development expressed by different sectors, different political parties and individuals of the Hong Kong community from August 31 to December 15 last year, and has set out in the over a thousand pages of Appendices the relevant statements, results of opinion polls, etc., collected by the Government. The information has also been uploaded in full to the website for public inspection. From the information set out in the Report, we can see that the issue of constitutional development remains controversial, and opinions remain divergent within the community. The situation up till now remains the same.
Ends/Wednesday, January 21, 2015
|
