Connecting Local Politics

Interview with Emily Lau by Australian Broadcasting Corporation reporter Mark Colvin

Visit Emily Lau's website

MARK COLVIN: What next for Hong Kong, now that its chief executive Tung Chee-Hwa has ended the speculation and admitted that he is stepping down?

Tung Chee-Hwa has led Hong Kong since the handover from Britain to China in 1997.

For at least the last couple of years he's been doing so despite considerable and vocal opposition from many who saw him as much too close to Beijing, and not close enough to the people of Hong Kong itself.

His likely successor is the man who's been working as Mr Tung's deputy, the Chief Secretary Donald Tsang.

He's popular, but there's speculation that Beijing has its doubts about him.

Emily Lau leads the pro Democracy Frontier Party, and a short time ago I asked her about Tung Chee-Hwa's departure.

EMILY LAU: I think the Hong Kong people found it very frustrating to have a Chief Executive who acts like a lackey of Beijing, always there to second-guess the wishes of the masters up there and of course the wishes of a few tycoons who helped to put him in to office.

And time and time again, when people express their views on various issues, they were inevitably brushed aside, and of course culminating in a huge march on July 1st of 2003, when Mr Tung tried to bulldoze legislation on national security, through the Legislative Council.

People wanted democracy, but Mr Tung did not help to convey such wishes to Beijing, instead he helped Beijing to suppress the demands here, and hence we had another big march on July 1st last year.

So, I think people have lost patience, lost confidence in Tung and he had stayed on for far too long.

MARK COLVIN: In that sense, do you think that it's a victory for people power?

EMILY LAU: To a certain extent I think you can say that, definitely.

I mean put it the other way, if he had been performing well, he wouldn't have stepped down, and I think that the central Government also recognised that he is very much a liability.

But, the disturbing thing that's facing us now is the aftermath. It seems that now that Beijing has lost confidence in some of the people here, so they are moving in thick and fast to micro-manage everything.

Previously, maybe they were pulling strings from behind the scenes. Now, they are moving centre-stage.

MARK COLVIN: So you've lost Tung Chee-Hwa, but you're not necessarily going to get a more democratic leadership?

EMILY LAU: Not at all, in fact, I think we are taking a big retrograde step, because they are managing everything.

And so, Hong Kong people have been reduced, to just being disinterested bystanders.

MARK COLVIN: Does it matter to Hong Kong people?

There's a cynical view that says that Hong Kongers, what they really care about is economic growth, and if they've got that, democracy takes a backseat.

EMILY LAU: That's not true. Last year, in April last year, Beijing has already decided that Hong Kong cannot have democratic elections in the year 2007 and 2008, but then a few months later, more than half a million people turn out to march and you know, although Beijing has already said no, they still said, 'Yes, we want democracy.'

MARK COLVIN: But you still didn’t get a majority in the elections of course.

EMILY LAU: No, because the system was against us. So we want to change the system.

MARK COLVIN: So you say it's essentially, there's a gerrymander?

EMILY LAU: Yes, well, it's a system which only allow a very small handful of people to elect some members.

In some cases it's not even people, it's companies. One company, one vote, one bank, one vote, one transport company, one insurance company, one vote. I mean, how ludicrous!

Anyway, now with the departure of Tung, we would like to urge the central Government, to have some confidence in the Hong Kong people, because we are not trying to make Hong Kong independent, we are not trying to turn it into a base to subvert the Communist Party, but we want to have a high degree of autonomy.

It seems the central Government has learned nothing from the disaster of C.H Tung, and if so, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes!

MARK COLVIN: What if they put in Donald Tsang, who's been a very respected and quite popular civil servant?

Will that calm your fears at all?

EMILY LAU: No, not at all. If Donald Tsang is going to be anointed to office and owe his support to Beijing and a few tycoons, he's going to act like C.H Tung all over again?

MARK COLVIN: So, what do you want and what is practicable to do, given that the Chinese in Beijing, presumably don't want the rest of the country looking at Hong Kong and saying well, we'd like some of that democracy too.

EMILY LAU: Well, a few weeks ago, nobody would've predicted that Mr Tung would step down, so, let's not talk about what is practicable, what is possible.

We will have to try and convince Beijing that Hong Kong is ready for democracy. That's what we want, we want the power to elect the Chief Executive, maybe Donald will still get elected. So be it, but he would behave very differently, if he were elected by the people at large, rather than handpicked by a few powerful people.

MARK COLVIN: Emily Lau, the leader of the pro-democracy, Frontier Party, in Hong Kong.

Read the article and vote

China's decision to remove Hong Kong leader Tung Chee-hwa leaves the former British colony in limbo and raises questions about the territory's much-vaunted autonomy, analysts and commentators said.

Hong Kong newspapers all announced Wednesday that Tung would be stepping down as chief executive this month, but Tung as well as the Hong Kong and Chinese governments have refused all comment.

China's handling of Tung's resignation more than two years before his term was due to expire was criticised in Hong Kong, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997 under a system allowing the city a high degree of autonomy.

The South China Morning Post newspaper said the issue posed questions about Hong Kong's civil and economic freedoms, protected in the Basic Law mini-constitution under which the capitalist enclave returned to China.

"(This) could cast a shadow over the One Country, Two Systems concept," the paper said in an editorial.

"If the central government effectively removes him from office, we will be further away from the idea of 'Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong'."

Christine Loh, convenor of independent think-tank Civic Exchange, described events as "Chinese political theatre at its most fascinating".

"Nothing is what it seems. There is little transparency and accountability," Loh said in her daily newsletter.

Under the terms of the 1997 handover from Britain, the free-wheeling capitalist enclave of seven million people on the southern Chinese coast was allowed to run its own affairs for a period of 50 years.

Commentators complained the news blackout and secretive handling of Tung's resignation was typical of a totalitarian state, not a modern capitalist society.

"This is what happens when you have a cockamamie system," broadcaster and pundit Steve Vines said on RTHK radio. "Nobody here is consulted, nobody is in the loop. It's no way of running (things)."

A senior Hong Kong government source said all news about Tung's future would come from the Chinese leadership.

"This has always been in China's hands -- they are his boss," said the source. "The news will come from them."

Newspapers Wednesday reported that Tung would step down citing ill health and stress.

They said he had offered to quit many times during his eight gaffe-prone years clouded by economic recessions, huge rows over democratic reform, policy woes and perceived interference by Beijing.

Christine Loh wondered whether the delay in China's confirmation indicated there had been squabbles over the terms of Tung's retirement.

"For someone in Tung's position to go, there has to be some negotiations on terms," she said. "The delay may signify negotiations have not been completed."

The delays served to highlight the failings of Tung's rule, she said.

"The danger in keeping silent for much longer is that it will be perceived as another crisis of governance ... except this time it will affect Beijing's handling of Hong Kong affairs."

Senior politicians have been left guessing when Tung might go. Cabinet member Selina Chow told reporters to wait 48 hours for news while pro-Tung legislator Ma Lik said they should hold on for a week.

Tung's possible early exit has been mooted since 2003 when his government was plunged into crisis after more than 500,000 people took to the streets to protest proposed anti-subversion laws proposed by China.

His position was further weakened last year by a bruising battle with pro-democracy groups over the timing of democratic reforms. Another half million people marched through the streets in July 2004 to demand universal suffrage to elect Tung's successor in 2007.

His tenure reached its nadir in December when Tung and his cabinet were given a public dressing down by Chinese President Hu Jintao for their poor performance.

Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse

Vancouver - The UBC Election Stock Market (UBC-ESM) at the Sauder School of Business opens February 1, for trading on the May 17, 2005, British Columbia Provincial Election.

Operated during various Canadian federal and B.C. provincial elections since 1993, the UBC-ESM is an online, real-time market where the “shares” (or contracts) being traded are based on the outcome of an election. Past UBC ESMs have accurately predicted the outcome, within a few seats held, of the 2001 B.C. Provincial Election and 2000 and 1997 Federal Elections. This year the British Columbia provincial election and the referendum on electoral reform will be the focus of the stock market.

Participants in the stock market invest their own funds to buy and sell financial contracts representing the political parties, and in addition, bear the risk of losing money as well as earning profits.

“Election stock markets, like the UBC-ESM, have proven themselves capable of predicting with great accuracy the results of elections in Canada, the United States and elsewhere,” says Professor Tom Ross, Director of the Phelps Centre for the Study of Government and Business and Co-Director of the UBC-ESM. “Markets such as this are successful, in part because they capture the opinions of a geographically diverse electorate, through the traders. The fact that they have invested their own real money provides motivation to the traders who can earn profits or lose money depending on their success at predicting the political parties’ fortunes.”

Four markets will operate during the lead-up to the B.C. provincial election: a “Seats Market,” a “Popular Vote Market,” a “Majority Government Market,” and an “Electoral Reform Referendum Market.”

The UBC-ESM operates on a not-for-profit basis, with the results of the market contributing to research and teaching at UBC on market and trader behaviour. The minimum deposit required to open an account is $25.00, and the maximum amount that may be invested is $1,000.00 per account. At the close of the market, participants’ portfolios are repurchased by the UBC-ESM at prices determined by the election results. Individual traders will earn profits or bear losses depending upon whether the final values of their portfolios exceed or are lower than their initial investments.

PLEASE NOTE: The Election Stock Market will be open from February 1, 2005 at 12 a.m. PST to May 16, 2005 at 11 p.m. PST. Individuals will not be able to open accounts until after the market opens at 12 a.m. on February 1, 2005.

To open an account, or to watch the results, visit http://esm.ubc.ca./BC05/index.php

By David Bauder, Associated Press

Despite its windfall from political advertising last fall, local TV news in 11 major markets spent little time covering local politics, a new study has concluded.

More than 90 percent of newscasts examined last fall had no news about campaigns for the House of Representatives, local or state governments. They devoted eight times the amount of coverage to people injured in accidents, said the Lear Center Local News Archive.

"If you want to get on local news, it's easier to be in a freak accident than to run for local office,'' said Marty Kaplan, professor at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School, which worked with the University of Wisconsin on the study. Researchers looked at all the evening and late-night newscasts in 11 cities for the 29 days before the Nov. 2, 2004 election.

The study is being released today in Washington by the Lear Center, which has encouraged local television news to be more aggressive in covering politics. Their findings this time mirror similar studies done in 2000 and 2002.

Local stations took in an estimate $1.6 billion in political advertising in 2004, according to the Alliance for Better Campaigns. That more than doubles the $770 million the stations got four years earlier.

More than half of those local news broadcasts contained a story on the Bush-Kerry presidential race, compared to 8 percent that had a local political story.

One reason local political races may be avoided is the broad geographic reach of some stations. A New York City station, for example, may not want to risk spending two minutes on a Brooklyn race for fear of turning off viewers in Manhattan or New Jersey.

"That's a challenge,'' said Barbara Cochran, president of the Radio and Television News Directors Association. "It isn't to say you don't do that, but it's a challenge.''

Cochran also noted that a vast majority of local races are not particularly competitive.

Kaplan agreed it was a challenge to cover these races, but that local stations have promised to do so in order to get their licenses to operate.

The time spent on the presidential race may have also taken time away from local races, he said. While national news broadcasts and cable news are also outlets for presidential news, there's usually no other TV outlet for the local stories.

Since there are many viewers who watch local newscasts and don't read a newspaper or watch national news, it's important for those stations to keep on top of the presidential race, Cochran said.

The study also appeared to give no credit to stations like those in Seattle that sponsored candidate debates because they weren't shown within the newscasts, she said.

In U.S. Senate races, the amount of time spent on commercials outnumbered that for actual campaign news by a 17-to-1 ratio, the study said.

As with many national newscasts, the study criticized the stations for spending more time on campaign strategy than issues. But it said the stations did a generally good job in informing viewers where to vote and if there were any polling problems.

The markets included in the study were New York; Los Angeles; Philadelphia; Dallas; Seattle; Miami; Denver; Orlando; Tampa; Dayton, Ohio; and Des Moines, Iowa.

Why was BuyBlue.org started?

On the morning after the 2004 election, half of the country woke up in disbelief and disgust. Shortly afterwards it turned to anger and bitterness and many were entertaining moving to another country. It didn't take long for all of us to collectively realize that we had lost our country to the other side and we wanted, no needed to do something about it. It was at that moment that the original idea for BuyBlue.org was born.

What is BuyBlue.org all about?

Mission Statement: BuyBlue.org supports businesses that share our progressive values and ideals. BuyBlue.org uses our power as consumers to vote with our wallets, supporting businesses that abide by sustainability, workers' rights, environmental standards, and corporate transparency. At the same time, BuyBlue.org focuses sharply on businesses that violate the essential values of a sustainable, fair and profitable society through their policies and the politicians they support.

Vision Statement: BuyBlue.org will become a powerful tool used by a community of millions dissatisfied with the ineffectiveness of our elected and appointed leaders. We will form strong coalitions with stockholders, shareholders, corporations, small businesses and communities which share our values to gain strength through numbers. We will influence the political landscape, stimulate economic growth among participating businesses and industries and use the American dollar as an incentive for corporate transparency and responsibility.

Go to Buy Blue

For Women Seeking Office, Washington Is The Hot Spot

By Karen Breslau on Newsweek

Jan. 31 issue - In 1992, Christine Gregoire, then running for attorney general of Washington, made a pilgrimage to the offices of EMILY's List, the legendary fund-raising network for women candidates. At the end of a daylong campaign course, EMILY's List founder Ellen Malcolm ushered Gregoire into a back room. "Ask me for money," Malcolm said. But Gregoire choked. "I thought, I can't do that," says Gregoire. "After I stumbled around for a bit, Ellen said, 'Let me play the candidate, and I'll show you how'." That conversation was invaluable, says Gregoire, who earlier this month was inaugurated as governor after a contested triple recount gave her a 129-vote lead over her Republican opponent, Dino Rossi. Not being squeamish about raising money - $6 million for her campaign and $2 million more for the recount - "is one way you make yourself credible," says Gregoire.

It's a lesson the women of the Evergreen State have learned well. Although Rossi is suing for a new election, Gregoire's victory makes Washington - at least for now - the first state to have a woman in the statehouse and two in the U.S. Senate, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell. They are not anomalies in Washington: Gregoire, Murray and Cantwell, all Democrats, are creatures of a political culture that has produced greater electoral gains for women per capita than any state in the country - ranging from school boards and city councils all the way up. National groups are studying the state's political farm system in hopes of replicating it elsewhere. "Washington has normalized the whole idea of women leading," says Marie Wilson, of the White House Project, an organization promoting women's political involvement.

There's no easy explanation for how Washington came to be girls' state. The state's progressive frontier culture is part of it. "Women arrived here in covered wagons," Gregoire told NEWSWEEK. "Their contributions were respected from the beginning." Seattle elected the nation's first female big-city mayor, Bertha K. Landes, in 1926, and the state got its first female governor, Dixie Lee Ray, in 1976. But the big breakthrough came in 1992, when women nationwide were swept into office following outrage over the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. Murray, a self-described "mom in tennis shoes," vaulted to the U.S. Senate; Cantwell, then 34, was elected to the House of Representatives, and Gregoire became attorney general. "You reach a certain threshold, and then everyone becomes a role model," says Cantwell, whose 2000 Senate run was inspired by Murray.

Women have also benefited from the lack of an old boy's network. The state's relatively weak political parties and open primaries make it easier for newcomers to break in. Washington's tech-driven, entrepreneurial economy has also generated a high number of women business owners, says Seattle political consultant Cathy Allen. "Women here are writing the checks to candidates," she says. "They are more invested in the system." Though Washington is a Blue State, Republican women have also fared just fine. Conservative Jennifer Dunn, a top fund-raiser for George W. Bush and former chair of the state GOP, represented suburban Seattle in Congress for 12 years. In 2004, Cathy McMorris, a pro-life Republican, was elected to Congress from Spokane.

All three of Washington's top women have compelling life stories. Murray, a homemaker, was so angry about education-budget cuts that she got herself elected to the state Senate. Gregoire started her career as a clerk typist, put herself through law school, then became a crusading anti-tobacco attorney general. Cantwell, the first college graduate in her family, made (and lost) her own fortune as a software executive during the 1990s. "When I ran for Senate in 1992, I had women saying to me, 'Don't you think a man should do that?' or 'Put your name on the ballot as Pat, not Patty'," says Murray, who was re-elected to a third term last year. In Washington, no one dares to offer that advice now. Women rule.

© 2005 Newsweek, Inc.

Governor Gregoire's Legislative Agenda