Zhou Bajun points out that constitutional reform process is a non-starter until livelihoods in HK begin to improve

There are two contrasting opinions regarding priorities in Hong Kong governance in the next five years. One insists the special administrative region government must restart the constitutional reform and push it through till universal suffrage is achieved; otherwise political wrangling will continue and divide Hong Kong to no end at the expense of economic development and people's livelihood. The other maintains that Hong Kong must focus on economic development and improving the public well-being instead. This is because nothing else can succeed without a strong economy. Each of these views seems to hold its own, which means Hong Kong has to choose either one pragmatically.

First, we can agree that constitutional development, economic transformation and improving people's livelihood are all major challenges facing Hong Kong that demand proper resolution at an early date. That said, it is unrealistic to expect all of them to be resolved in five years, not only because there is not enough time or energy but also because not all of them have the right conditions to happen.

In the next five years Hong Kong won't have the necessary conditions to re-launch constitutional reform aimed at implementing universal suffrage but can continue with the structural transformation of its economy that will help improve people's livelihood, although it won't be easy by all means.

On March 31, 22 "pan-democrat" Legislative Council members released a joint declaration greeting Chief Executive-designate Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor with five hefty demands on governance to be met during her term in office. The first and second demands are: have the central authorities take back the white paper issued in 2014 regarding implementation of "One Country, Two Systems" in the Hong Kong SAR; and re-launch constitutional reform regardless of the legally binding decision announced by the National People's Congress Standing Committee on Aug 31, 2014 that established a statutory framework for Chief Executive elections by universal suffrage.

Anyone who knows a thing or two about Hong Kong politics would understand there is no way the next SAR government or the central government would even consider those two demands. How can anyone justify getting the constitutional reform restarted like that? And how realistic do they think they are about dictating to the central government over Hong Kong's constitutional status? It would be a complete waste of precious time and energy and only further divide Hong Kong society.

Obviously opposition parties have to keep talking about restarting constitutional reform, because it is the only political talking point they think might win public support; whereas focusing on economic and livelihood issues would drown out their political sound bites and undermine their efforts to win the next district council and LegCo elections. That is why they must stop the fifth-term SAR government from giving priority to economic development and improving people's well-being.

Obstruction by the opposition will no doubt make it harder for the SAR government to formulate and implement policies designed to boost economic development and improve people's livelihood but it is not insurmountable. Firstly the pro-establishment parties as a whole will support the government. Certain establishment parties and political figures may have been influenced by the CE election in March and are now veering toward "open-minded establishmentarians", with the tendency to pick fights with the government over certain economic policies but will not abandon the pro-establishment camp. They will support the SAR government somehow, as long as they feel obliged to remain on board.

Secondly the opposition camp will continue splintering. The radical opposition faction will remain committed to filibustering in the LegCo because it is the only way they know to win over certain voters. Among the mainstream opposition parties, meanwhile, the Democratic Party has shown some slight reluctance to support filibustering but the Civic Party's attitude remains ambiguous. Furthermore, both parties have economic brains that are eager to compete with the government over development and livelihood policies. As long as public opinion is focused on economic and livelihood issues, mainstream opposition parties may not give up filibustering completely but should be tempted to do it selectively.

Thirdly, a very important fact to note is that more and more Hong Kong residents are demanding all parties concerned put aside their political differences and focus on the economy and people's livelihood. A slew of recent opinion polls show the public favors giving priority to economic development. That is why mainstream media should help build popular consensus on such issues.

(HK Edition 05/05/2017 page1)