My level of sympathy for Hong Kong’s pro-democracy parties has been waning since… well, ever since one-time Democratic Party leader Martin Lee started to lapse into a self-indulgent, whiny martyrdom routine aimed at an audience in Washington DC. Their biggest blunder has been their refusal to accept that genuine universal suffrage in Hong Kong is simply not compatible with one-party rule by the Communists over the PRC.
While they have spent years torturing themselves and the rest of us with lengthy nitpicking and moaning about arcane details of constitutional reform, the people of Hong Kong have been increasingly abused, ripped-off and under-served by exploitative property barons’ cartels, arrogant and idiotic policymaking, lousy schools and all the rest. If the pro-Beijing Democratic [sic] Alliance for the Blah Blah of HK were more independent and less guided by their Communist superiors, and if the pro-establishment Liberal Party were less obsessed with their own narrow commercial interests, they could between them wipe the pro-democrats off the electoral map.
As it happens, the two have now caught the Civic Party – the pan-democratic camp’s rich, cerebral and beautiful people – in a pincer movement over the issue of foreign maids’ fight to claim permanent residency in Hong Kong. The DAB delivered the first blow through its wild, racist alarmism over the prospect of half a million Filipinos settling in Hong Kong and sucking the health and welfare systems dry. CP lawyer-member Gladys Li is a legal advisor to the maids; a fellow lawyer-member airily dismissed the Great Filipino Brown Horror Threat as overblown, while others have stressed the importance of rule of law and human rights.
Now, just one day after I spelt Selina Chow’s name wrongly for the 5,000th time in my life, the Liberal Party goes for the fragrant, smooth-skinned jugular with a newspaper ad directly attacking the Civic Party’s stance on the fevered issue. It re-hashes the frightening statistics (helpers to get over HK$11,000 a month at minimum wage rates, HK$15 billion in extra health/education/welfare costs, 100,000 more families waiting for public housing) and holds Gladys Li and the CP generally to blame if the courts decide in favour of the maids.
The CP’s response is tragically defensive, indeed timid, and written in that turgid detail-obsessed, snore-inducing style favoured by members of the legal profession even when they are off-duty working as politicians and free to let their nastiest rhetorical capabilities do their worst.
I would happily match the LP’s HK$50,000 budget to pay for a CP counter-attack in the newspapers. The CP would say:
The Liberal Party are liars. Even if the court rules in favour (a huge ‘if’), few foreign maids would be eligible for full residency. Even fewer would overcome the family, financial and bureaucratic barriers to settling relatives here.
The Liberal Party are dangerous. They are willing to risk the rule of law, the integrity of our courts and the independence of our judges – without which Hong Kong people’s cherished liberties are defenceless – just to score political points and win votes from ignorant people at coming elections.
The Liberal Party are racist. Nearly everyone in Hong Kong is of immigrant stock. The LP is whipping up fears about people because of their skin colour. This is an insult to decency, fairness and Hong Kong values. They should be ashamed of themselves for damaging our city’s image.
The Liberal Party are self-serving scum. They care about their money, not the Hong Kong people. Miriam Lau has put the transport lobby’s profits ahead of kids’ and old folks’ lives on the roads by vetoing tougher road safety measures. Tommy Cheung risked workers’ health by delaying the ban on smoking in restaurants and proposed an inhumane HK$20-an-hour minimum wage. Vincent Fang tried to endanger consumers’ health by opposing tougher laws on food labeling. Etc, etc.
Whatever you may think about the maids or other things we may agree or disagree about, remember one thing: the Liberal Party are a bunch of slimy nematodes unworthy of your vote.
[Add photos of them for full, gruesome effect]
Of course, to the lawyers that inhabit the CP this would be unacceptable: emotional, unprofessional and non-factual. They don’t get it. It doesn’t have to be measured, accurate or even sincere (I don’t believe half the above, and I wrote it); the object is to verbally kick your enemy in the teeth over and over. Smear back, with double the quantity of mud. Gentlemanly debate won’t do it.
Another action-packed day in the long, drawn-out demise of Hong Kong’s pro-democrats.
Depressingly true.
Nice rant!
“Helpers to get over HK$11,000 a month at minimum wage rates, […] 100,000 more families waiting for public housing.”
Surely even that lot can see that these two are mutually exclusive? If domestic helpers’ renumeration were to be brought in line with that of less brown people (a move which I would heartily applaud), almost no-one in Hong Kong would employ them – coincidentally another step forward in the the long slog towards joining the developed world.
In the 50s, 60s and 70s guest workers flooded into Europe. People assumed that eventually they would go home.
Now they are millions and millions of Turks in Germany, Moroccans in Holland, Algerians in France and an amalgam of many other Third World nationalities spread all over North West Europe.
And guess what ? Not only did they not go home: they multiply way above the average birth-rate and they are there to stay. They will never go home.
I can imagine the same thing happening in Hong Kong if they open the floodgates. And I say: thanks, but, no thanks.
Feel free to fuck off Joe.
‘Open the flood gates..’
‘..they multiply way above the average birth-rate and they are there to stay’
You bigoted little racist nobber.
The so-called pro-democrats are lost in the wilderness, squabbling amongst themselves and intent on self-destruction. Every time I hear the shrill tones of Emily LAU on the radio I reach for off button because I know what’s coming … a steadily escalating tirade that leaves her breathless and me with earache. Meanwhile WONG Yuk-man and his crew are out to give democracy a bad name with their stupid antics in LegCo and on the streets. Beijing has little to be concerned about because the pro-democrats are incapable of ‘united front’ tactics.
The similaralities to the great mainland right of abode crises in the late ‘90’s could not be more striking – Then all sort of ludicrous numbers were conjured up to show how many new housing estates etc would have to be built, the drain in Hong Kong miniscule monitory resources (currently equal to 2 years of total government expenditure) etc etc ad nauseum.
To deny right of abode to a person based on nationality and job (which is what this boils down) is plain wrong – period. That the odious Miriam, Vincent and Tommy are its cheerleaders is par for the course. If the lovely Audrey can’t stand up and give these buffoons a good verbal kicking then she deserves a good electoral beating. That would be a shame because, without the Pro-Democrat block vote in Legco, the new legislature will get a 2/3 majority vote and retain functional constituencies long into the future meaning many more entertaining years of Miriam, Vince and Tommy.
I’m cautious on this one. Looking at how things have unfolded in the UK with years of unfettered immigration leading to the creation of an underclass, who have contributed to the recent unrest. In Yuen Long you already have the offspring of former Nepalese soldiers involved in triad gangs. Whilst the LP and DAB have overcooked their arguments, it must be recognised that real concerns exist about allowing a influx of unqualified migrants to add to the unqualified masses crossing the border from up north. Clearly, the liberal sensibilities of Audrey and Gladys may be offended or it is that this is a nice little earner for the legal types.
I have just heard on the news that the pan-democrats have agreed to hold a ‘primary’ to select a candidate in the CE anointment process.
Chasing their tails again, I fear.
Stephen nailed the real issue in that all this scaremongering is to erode the Pro-Dem block vote. Unfortunately, people are playing into the hands of the
government and pro-government parties. The District Council elections in Nov would be nasty, regardless of when the court ruling comes out.
As I have commented before, often the longest names of political parties ( and dictatorship countries) mean just the opposite of what they say. Thus we have the (non-) Democratic (evil-) Alliance for the (non-) Progress and (non-)Betterment of HK . Which is almost as bad as the Peoples’ (non-) Democratic (non-) Republic of Korea.
Now the Liberals betray their true nature, as being about THE most NON – Liberal party in HK.
And I bet they all have at least 2 Filipina domestic helpers at home to tender to their delicate needs and whims , all earning not a cent more than they are legally obliged to pay *
Bloody hypocrites, all of them.
But I agree Hemlock’s lack of patience for the Democrats. It seems they never had nor still do not have any platform except to bleat ” we want free elections : gimme gimme gimme ” . Unless they raise some political leaders with the clout to actually run HK come 2017 I certainly will not be voting for them.
Guess that only leaves the Civic Party …..
(* Declaration of interest : I have an Indonesian maid, and I pay her more than I am legally required to pay her )
It is cruel to allow people to work and live in your city for a dozen years or more—until by any commonsense standard it has become their second home—but deny them permanent residence. If guest workers can never qualify for residence, then their stay should be limited to five years, to make clear to all that the arrangement is strictly temporary.
It is also cruel to deny people a right that appears to be plainly stated in the law, going by what a disinterested observer would consider the obvious meaning of the words. Perhaps the law is badly written. In that case, revise it, but until then, apply it fairly, as written.
I can’t see it happening in my lifetime, since public opinion (even some Immigration Department staff) is so much against the idea of permanent residence for non-ethnic-Chinese. The courts are only human, and will begin to lose the support of their own administrative staff if they make hugely unpopular rulings.
In any case, they know, and everybody knows, that the executive — so much for the separation of powers stipulated in the Basic Law — can always win, by threatening to appeal again to Peking.
It’s the same cleft stick as the push for universal suffrage. Some of the smears, directed against the most articulate opponents, will stick. People may think about further undermining the rights of those who are already “non-native” Hongkongers. Rather than starting to negotiate with thugs, even through a proxy, it may be better — and in the very long run more successful — to take a principled stand.
mumphLT – please don’t bring the ‘R’ word into it.
The oppression & labelling as racist of anyone in the UK who has criticised any non-white person over the last 30 years has helped bring about what they have there now.
I’m sure our courts will do the right thing based on our laws and not on political mudslinging in an election year.
No – I’ll call it what it is – racism. For want of a better word to cover ‘feeling negative about & discriminate against someone on account of the colour of their skin because I’m a shallow, ignorant bigot’ racism for he moment will have to do.
In this case this is what it is – it is not me labeling someone as a racist because they are pointing out some error in social / economic policy. Joe Blow singled out those who aren’t Northern European Caucasians so I’ve called him a racist.
Hello ALL
I am not in the habit of copying-on the usual ‘funny’ stuff that arrives in my email box daily, but this one seemed particularly pertinent re the debate on our future CEs (assuming all the facts are true, which I cannot verify)
______________________________
If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis,would you recommend that she have an abortion?
Read the next question before looking at the response for this one.
Question 2:
It is time to elect a new world ( HK? ) leader, and only your vote counts. Here are the facts about the three candidates.
Candidate A:
Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with astrologists.
He’s had two mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 Martinis a day.
Candidate B:
He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college
and drinks a quart of brandy every evening.
Candidate C:
He is a decorated war hero. He’s a vegetarian, doesn’t smoke, drinks an
occasional beer and never committed adultery.
Which of these candidates would be our choice?
Decide first… No peeking, and then scroll down for the response.
( I cut out the scroll)
Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolf Hitler.
And, by the way, on your answer to the abortion question:
If you said YES, you just killed Beethoven.
Pretty interesting isn’t it? Makes a person think before judging someone.
_________________________
Makes Donald … and even Henry … squeaky clean , or maybe NOT so ( but did anyone notice the Leader in yesterday’s SCMP saying that there will soon be investigations into the murky past of all the short-listed candidates for CE : e.g . what did they smoke as teenagers and how many mainland misstresses ? . Moot point ! )
I guess one could add another Candidate : D
Someone who , at the command of his political leader/dictator, arranged the deaths of tens of thousands of intellectuals and followed every beck and call of said dictator.
Yes you have guessed correctly : Deng Xiao Ping , my ( TRUE No. 1 ) hero of the 20th Century
To be a TRUE leader one has to be willing to be reiviled in one’s lifetime, only to to be exonerated 50 years later
I suspect JoeBlow might be a bit like me, not the least concerned with what anyone is – just what they do.
If it happens to be that a group of people who behave the same way have some common denominator (such as ethnicity), it’s more a label than the observer being racist by referring to that group by that common factor.
Ethnically-correct HK folk don’t like dark skinned folk, full stop – unless they run a scrap yard in Kam Tin.
But since ethnically-correct HK folk were against their OWN offspring born on the wrong side of the border fence getting RoA, and since most ethnically-correct HK folk are ultimately not of ancestral HK origin, the R-word might also include an element of RESENTMENT (aka jealousy – “red eye”).