Democratic Party should reinvent itself for a better Hong Kong

Mark Pinkstone/Former Chief Information Officer of HK government

The disbandment of the Democratic Party from Hong Kong’s political scene would be seen as a blow to the HKSAR’s political development. In all democracies an incumbent government is balanced by an opposition. And the Democratic Party has played that role since its formation in 1994.

Way back in the 70's and 80's there were no political parties in Hong Kong. All members of the Legislative Council were appointed by the governor. But there was an underlying muttering among the young academics seeking change to the way Hong Kong was being administered. The government of the day was horrified that someone had the audacity to question its actions and set up a secret task force – Special Committee on Pressure Groups (SCOPG) – to monitor their actions. This was the start of political development in Hong Kong.

Two of these special interest groups – Meeting Point and United Democrats – merged in 1994 to form the Democratic Party of Hong Kong, led by barrister Martin Lee.

It gained in popularity and became the largest party in the legislature, which, at that time was 50 per cent elected and 50 per cent appointed.  But oppose they did. They protested and held vigils against the Tiananmen Square incidents with students and called for the end of the one-party rule in China. It was basically an anti-China organisation. They boycotted the Provisional Legislative Council in 1997 which was formed to transcend the legislature from British to Chinese Sovereignty, known as the “through train.”

By this time, Hong Kong had a fully elected legislature – 50 per cent elected by geographic constituencies and 50 per cent by functional constituencies – with the Democratic Party being the largest. The goal is to have a fully elected legislature by universal suffrage in accordance with the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s mini constitution, with no timetable set.

But this is not possible until there is a mature legislature and a public that fully understands Hong Kong’s relationship with China and its Central Committee. Hong Kong is, after all, and inalienable part of China. However, this was the downfall of the Democratic Party.

New blood joining the party were mainly high-spirited young lawyers and university graduates keen to change China and Hong Kong: the impossible. Their lack of maturity and understanding created squabbles within the Party and fractures appeared within its hierarchy.

During the mid- 90's the fractions within the party were becoming more public and the rebels, known as the Young Turks, took control of its leadership. Hong Kong was becoming more politicized and more political groups or parties emerged. The Young Turks have thrown their cultural heritage to the wind and have no loyalty to their homeland. Instead, they have been seeking independence for Hong Kong, which is totally unrealistic in practical terms. Besides, the majority of Hong Kong’s population is in favour of maintaining the status quo; the one country, two systems.

The Party was fairly well organized with 94 district offices and when organizing the mass protest against Article 23 legislation on national security it called 40,000 supporters personally on its data base to join the demonstration.  The protests won the day, and the government shelved the proposal to 2024 when it was passed,

However, the Party was losing ground. Hong Kong people don’t like confrontation and became more supportive towards pro-Beijing politicians. All they want is peace and stability. In the 2007 District Council elections, the Party lost 36 seats, compared with the 2003 elections, and 23 of the party’s incumbent councillors were ousted.

The immature Young Turks were also behaving badly in the Chamber by refusing to take the Oath of Allegiance as prescribed by the attending officers.  They were disqualified, as they would in any country, but they still cried foul and continued to get western support. There were several showtime antics and walkouts which did not endear them to the general public.

The party continued to have internal problems and by December 2020 some 50 members had left the party to form new parties.

On February 20, this year, the party announced it was preparing to disband, which immediately caught the attention of the international media, blaming the disbandment as a result of Beijing pressure.  Nothing could be further from the truth. It has run its course and its committee, at a soon to be announced general meeting, will decide whether to pack up their bags or stay in.

The problems with the Democratic Party has been internal bickering, but it serves a purpose in the Hong Kong political scene. It is the opposition. And blaming China does not help. Wikipedia, an internet portal encyclopaedia, said the party was to dissolve in 2025 after the party was unable to enter the elections at the end of the year with the national security threshold imposed. This is totally untrue as the elections are open to everyone. The piece was obviously written by a member of the party.

The best thing for the Party is to stay in the race by reinventing itself. Forget plans of grandeur and independence. Work with the people and with the administration to make Hong Kong a better place.

Mark Pinkstone

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Academics proclaim that in tariff wars there are no winners, all economies fell. True, but the current “war” is not about economics, as it started out to be, but a personal vendetta by US president Trump against China’s president Xi Jinping.

Trump started the war by imposing trade tariffs against all of its trading partners. There were no exceptions, even for those, like Hong Kong and Australia, who had deficits with the US.

Even though Hong Kong is a member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in its own right, Trump lumped Hong Kong under the broader China umbrella and imposed tariff hikes totalling 145 per cent against all products exported to the US. The rest of the world faced a base-line levy of 10 per cent. And this is where Trump’s plan became personal.

Trump’s plan was for the world to kowtow to him and acknowledge that he was the world’s leader. Most did, although there has not been any announcement of any deal being struck anywhere. And then came China’s Xi Jinping, who refused to kowtow, vowing to “fight to the end” and upped the ante of tariffs on US goods imported into the mainland.

Economies were floundering and markets were weak. Trump took advantage of the low market and after announcing exemptions for his billionaire club, while the rest of the population suffered, it appeared that he had made a deliberate gesture to manipulate the stock markets by declaring a 90-day pause in the tariffs. “Be cool” Trump wrote just hours before announcing the pause. “This is a great time to buy!” This was white collar terrorism in plain sight.

Global markets rose rapidly with the Hong Kong Stock Exchange up 51.17 per cent. But that bottomed out the following day amid rumors Trump was to declare martial law to police the southern border with Mexico.

The manoeuvre could have been taken from his book “How to make a deal”. Except it is not his book as he often boasts. The book was written by ghost writer Tony Schwartz who wrote in The New Yorker “Trump’s tweet that he has written bestselling books is one more deceit and delusion. He is incapable of reading a book, much less writing one.”

While Trump sits in the Oval Office contemplating how he can outsmart Xi, the Chinese president has been busy shoring up free trade deals in Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia. In all three South East Asian countries he was warmly greeted as a dear friend. Of the three, Vietnam is the hardest hit with a 43 per cent tax on its exports to the US.

Trump’s racist slurs against all things Chinese were compounded during the trade war when he threatened to delist Hong Kong and mainland stocks from all US exchanges – the New York Stock Exchange, Nasdaq and NYSE American. It is estimated there are 286 mainland and Hong Kong stocks with a market capitalization of US$1.1 trillion listed in the US.

And again, Trump has miscalculated his “punishment.” All companies delisted in the US will simply come to Hong Kong as their secondary and dual primary listing to raise funds and boost our Initial Public Offering (IPO) market.

Hong Kong’s financial secretary, Paul Chan Mo Po, is bullish about the outcome of the war, with Hong Kong becoming stronger as a leading fundraising hub and with enhanced trade ties with the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions.

But Trump is not stopping there and he’s trying every possible means to curtail China’s position on the world stage. After taking over control of the Panama Canal to tax mainland and Hong Kong ships passing through the waterway, he now plans to tax every ship made in China, regardless of its registration, when they visit US ports.

The actions by Trump have done more harm to himself than to the countries he targeted. In the eyes of world leaders, he cannot be trusted and trading with him in the future will be for essentials only. The harm he has done to his country will take years to repair, and those who voted for him will surely be more prudent when the next elections come about. He has failed miserably with his campaign policy to “Make America Great Again.” He has done exactly the opposite.