MR YIU SI-WING: President, the StandingCommittee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) has made a decision on theconstitutional reform for more than five months. Despite the fact thatpolicy-making officials from both the Central Government and the SAR Governmenthave stated the bottom line of the Central Government through differentchannels, Ms Cyd HO still moved this motion on "seeking the invalidationof the decision of the NPCSC and reactivating the constitutional reformprocess". I have a question about this motion: I wonder if Ms HO hasfailed to understand the Basic Law and the status of the NPCSC under theconstitutions of the State and Hong Kong, or she has not fully grasped thespirit of the 31 August Decision.

The NPCSC has a very important functionunder the constitutions of the State and Hong Kong. As evident from therelevant provisions of Hong Kong's Basic Law, the NPCSC has the powers toreturn the laws enacted by the HKSAR Government; to add national laws to thelist of laws in Annex III to the Basic Law; to decide that the HKSAR is in astate of emergency; to report for record the principal judges, and to proposebills for the interpretation and amendment to Hong Kong's Basic Law. Accordingto the relevant provisions of the Constitution, the NPCSC has the functions andpowers to interpret the Constitution, supervise the enforcement of theConstitution, as well as enact and interpret laws. State organs including theState Council of the People's Republic of China (PRC), the Central MilitaryCommission, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procurator ateof the PRC are also placed under its supervision. Therefore, the 31 AugustDecision made by the NPCSC shares the same status as other national laws, justlike the Basic Law. Therefore, it cannot be arbitrarily amended without specialreasons. Since the selection of the Chief Executive is an important politicalissue under the "one country, two systems" principle and in theimplementation of the Basic Law, the NPCSC Decision on this important politicalissue carries a significant meaning and is a very solemn matter. Therefore, anyattempt by the opposition camp to force the NPCSC into changing its decisionwould doom to fail.

The suggestion that the 31 August Decisionthrottles the room for implementing genuine universal suffrage can also be saidto be a fallacy. Implementing the selection of the Chief Executive by universalsuffrage is indeed a historical progress in Hong Kong's democratic developmentand a major reform of the political system of the HKSAR. Since the 31 AugustDecision will set the tune for the further development of Hong Kong'sdemocratic political system, it should not only be lawful, reasonable and fair,but also meticulous as there is no room for mistake. If the reform of HongKong's political system continues to progress under the framework of the BasicLaw, the constitutional reform will certainly make a great leap forward inaccordance with the proposal currently suggested for consultation. All otherproposals that depart from reality and contravene the 31 August Decision andthe Basic Law, vainly hoping to achieve everything in one go, will only end upin tatters.

President, the SAR Government has conductedextensive consultation over the past year or so. During the first round ofconsultation on the constitutional reform package, the "constitutionalreform trio" and the relevant government officials had attended a total of226 consultations and district events. They had also met with LegislativeCouncil Members from different political parties and affiliations time andagain to directly exchange views on the constitutional reform, as well asvisited the districts to listen to public views. During the consultationperiod, the Government received a total of some 120 000 submissions fromdifferent organizations and individuals, and all of them had been published.During the Occupy Central movement, the SAR Government had exercised thegreatest forbearance and understanding, and acted with restraint. It had alsoexpressed goodwill to the opposition party by, inter alia, arranging a dialoguebetween the "constitutional reform trio" and the Hong Kong Federationof Students, which aimed at forging consensus and alleviating the impact of theOccupy Central movement on the community. The SAR Government also hopes thatthe constitutional reform package can be passed smoothly so as to improve HongKong's political and economic environment, and the Central Government can feelrelieved in allowing us to carry out the constitutional reform beyond 2017. TheSAR Government has not, as described in the motion, "throttled the roomfor implementing genuine universal suffrage". Rather, it has sought theway out for constitutional reform in the light of the political reality in HongKong.

President, the opposition camp hasattempted to compel the Central and SAR Governments to make concessions throughwaging public opinion war and the radical Occupy Central movement, and even theintervention of external forces. Nonetheless, the result was proven to becounterproductive. The Central Government has become all the more concernedabout the risk associated with Hong Kong's constitutional reform, and is morealert to the intervention of external forces. Worse still, it has evenconsidered not relaxing the scope for Hong Kong to make decisions on itsconstitutional reform. We can thus see that the opposition camp has actuallysacrificed the well-being of 7 million people, and Hong Kong will eventually be“killed". I hope the opposition camp will reflect on what it has done, andstop engaging in confrontation or doing meaningless things. Instead of adoptingan antagonistic attitude, the opposition camp should have the broadness of mindand goodwill to extend olive branches and liaise with the Central and SARGovernments on its own initiative, with a view to forging consensus, breakingthe current deadlock as well as taking concerted effort to work for thewell-being of Hong Kong and the successful implementation of the constitutionalreform.

President, with these remarks, I oppose theoriginal motion