Kapok: the more the merrier, really?

The very fact that 25 lists of candidates vying for the directly elected seats in the September 17 Legislative Assembly election have been recognised valid by the Electoral Commission should feel like a relief. After all, these ad hoc groupings are what make the legislative elections in Macao look a tad competitive, even though the 14 seats they are fighting for only represent a minority in the Assembly. Another 12 are elected by functional constituencies in which six lists will be running unopposed in five electoral colleges — two lists will take part in the selection process for the professional college, but this is merely to draw an artificial distinction between lawyers and medical doctors in Macao. The seven remaining legislators, thus making 33 altogether, are directly designated by the Chief Executive himself, supposedly for their professionalism and to preserve a harmonious relationship between the legislative and the executive branches of government. Given the recent fiasco surrounding the Land Law, one can seriously doubt the rationale, but then, we don’t hear much from these guys.

In absolute numbers, 25 lists is a lot: we had only 15 in 2001 — the first post-handover election — and then 18 in 2005, 16 in 2009 and 20 in 2013. And 25 might not be the definitive number. Programs have just started to be submitted to the Electoral Commission, and thanks to the new “loyalty pledge” (to the Special Administrative Region and the Basic Law) enclosed in article 30 of the amended electoral law, the Commission is actually endowed with the power to interpret whether these pledges have been done in good faith or not — in Hong Kong, six candidates were disqualified over such an issue in August 2016. Even though the pledges are individually signed, this could heavily cripple some of the lists, which in any case will become irrefutably admitted to enter the fray only on August 8, after all forms of judicial appeal have been exhausted. And when it comes to politics in Macao, law, even in our second system, often follows northern influences, especially when it suits small-circle local interests: back in August 2014, the civil referendum organized by Macau Conscience over the confidence (lack of thereof) people had in Mr Chui Sai On had been branded as outright “illegal” by the government as well by as sycophantic appointed legislators whose capacity to change opinion would make even a Donald blush.

Now, looking at the citizens: back in 2001, there were 160,000 registered voters, whereas we stand at 307,000 today. Only two years after the handover, one could get elected with 5,000 votes (Jorge Manuel Fão), whereas in 2013 the least-well-elected candidate (Leong Veng Chai) gathered some 6,565 suffrages. In effect and relative terms, things have thus stayed remarkably stable in the past 16 years despite the extension of the franchise: if the electorate has doubled, the number of seats submitted to universal suffrage has only grown by 40 percent, and if we anticipate that the minimum number of votes to win a seat might be a little higher this time around — let’s say 7,000 votes — then this threshold has equally only increased by 40 percent!

In the past few weeks, a lot of ink has been spent on departing legislators — depending on the language and affiliation, symbolic mourning has been quite vocal in the press regarding Leonel Alves and Chiang Chi Keong. Others might or will stay though: the Chan Chak Mo, the Fong Chi Keong and even the Kou Hoi In, a legislator since 1992. Now, even Chan Meng Kam, the so-called “king of the votes” of 2013, announced he would not run for this term: fear not, his replacement, not to say his duplicate, Kyan Su Lone, has been dutifully endorsed and groomed for months! And then, William Kuan and his chaozhou followers are joining hands with Angela Leong, so the “sunflowers” should finally get the second seat they have been desperately running after since 2005!

Let’s hope the Democrats finally resort to tactical voting: confronted with an unfair system and manipulative opponents, they owe it to their progressive electorate.

Published in Macau Daily Times, July 7, 2017

Kapok: They talk, we listen

It was an epiphany of sorts. It was some kind of astonishment mixed with a sudden surge of exasperation: they were talking, we were listening, and everything had to be absorbed to the full. The scene was taking place on the sidelines of a SJM-sponsored dinner, and the comments were made by two of the most senior managers of the company, who were obviously well sought-after by journalists in attendance.
Mr Ambrose So, SJM’s CEO, was asked to comment on the remarks made by Li Gang, the director of the China Liaison Office, which related to the fact that the central authorities would introduce policies to support Macau’s battered economy. Mr So naturally appeared very confident that it would be so—we hope that this is what he is suggesting whenever he attends a meeting of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in Beijing—and that more cities in China will open up to individual travel schemes.

Then Mr So added that it was not only a question of “numbers” but one of “quality”, as if he were remembering that a few days back, the Secretary for social affairs and culture, Alexis Tam Chon Weng, had said that “more” was not an option. In the present conditions, we seem to be stuck at 21 million mainland visitors per year. So quality it has to be, not quantity! The question for Mr So is therefore how to, and I quote, “select the quality of visitors… and to attract high-quality and high-spending visitors”. What Mr So actually means by “high-spending” is, I am sure, preferably those who are glued to the gaming table!
And then I wondered: but how could one do that and isn’t this in contradiction with several policies supported by Beijing? The central authorities and the Macau government itself are advocating for the diversification of the economy.  In addition to this, if my memory serves me well, fund transfers to Macao by mainland visitors are strictly limited. And then, if the idea, just like in Bhutan, is to only attract the rich, what do we make of one of the four key components of Xi Jinping’s China Dream which is to “comprehensively build a moderately prosperous society”? Are creativity and culture only stemming from wealth? What has SJM done since it opened the Crazy Paris Show in the early 1980s to generate further interest in Macau in order to attract these premium customers—for more than one day, I mean? When was the last time diversification meant a little bit more for SJM than expanding culinary offerings, especially now that the “fish bowl” has gone? Well, the fact that Mr So defines the new game in town as developing Macao into “a center of amusement and leisure” instead of “tourism and leisure” says it all!

As a grand finale, Mr So was asked about the recent scandals and complaints revolving around certain junket operations. For him, junkets are of a different nature at SJM and function strictly within the law. In the words of Mr So, “I checked, they do not follow that same model”. He even went as far as embracing “a more regulated market”. Again, wasn’t it Stanley Ho himself who invented the VIP junket model in the early 1980s? Isn’t this model precisely the one that allows for legally registered stakeholders to avoid responsibility and scrutiny regarding credit extension and debt collection? I guess Mr So will not be proven wrong as long as the only solution championed by the DICJ is to create a code of ethics for junkets…

Finally, Mrs Angela Leong, SJM’s managing director, rejoiced at the temporary extension of her concession to Macao’s canidrome, announcing that SJM would engage into an ambitious renovation plan “to allow for cultural developments, and to allow young people to develop their business.” There is no doubt that Mrs Leong is listening more effectively during the meetings of the government’s Cultural Industries Committee than the ones of the Legislative Assembly. In any case however, i s whistling the tune of the hour enough? The last time SJM’s parent company invested money into these dilapidated and shameful facilities was in 1998… slightly better than the 1980s!

Published in Macau Daily Times, October 9th 2015

Kapok: Of expected uncertainties

To all the people who believe that the electoral campaign starting on August 31st and leading to the vote of “9.15” is an absolute travesty of democracy I say: You are wrong! Two reasons for the professional cynics to refrain from exercising their disheartening doubtful scorn for electoral politics in the SAR context: First of all, because quite a good number of very respectful, experienced and committed candidates are going to take that campaign very seriously—for that reason alone, comfy disdain is shameful; and then, one can indeed expect far more competition than the widespread “done deal” common sense would like us to believe—it is not only an additional two seats that are going to be contended, but at least five and possibly seven out of 14 opened to universal suffrage.
What is true though is that the government will still hold at least 80% of support in the new Assembly, whatever happens: Out of a total of 33 legislators, seven are directly appointed by the Chief Executive, 12 are endorsed—no real election there despite all the claims—by functional constituencies tightly intertwined together and with the government, and at the very least eight elected lawmakers will never fail to be supportive of the government’s policies, whatever disagreements they might have expressed—and that goes beyond party discipline and is more in tune with self-serving subservience. But then, alternative voices are needed, and this is why, despite the traditional patron-client relations that exist in Macao and the highly restrictive voting system that is being used for these elections (the inglorious modified D’Hondt method), we could be in for a few surprises—uncertainty in essence is democratic!
Despite the lack of reliable studies about voter behaviors—far too often we hear that people are not interested in politics in Macao, and yet samples and questionnaires are either unsatisfactory or biased—it has become rather obvious that a significant segment of the population is quite unhappy with the overall performance of the Legislature and only four lawmakers make the cut above 60% of satisfaction as reported last year by the Association of Macao New Vision: two democrats, Ng Kuok Cheong and Au Kam San, an independent legislator cum-civil servant representative José Pereira Coutinho and Kwan Tsui Hang (traditional Macao Federation of Trade Unions). The worst performers among the directly elected legislators are all from the business sector and especially casino-related—the last of them all being Angela Leong who also holds the record in her category for being the most absent in plenary sessions in 2012/2013. This disgruntlement regarding business-related legislators, the growing strength of the democrats who have been the highest vote-getters in the three previous elections and who are now becoming ever more assertive (aiming at five seats with three lists), the decline of traditional associations (why else offer Chan Hong a seat in an indirect constituency if the Kaifong was so confident?), and an electorate that has become younger at one end (52,000 voters out of a total of 277,000 are aged 29 and below) and more critical for the largest cohorts composed of people in their 50s (74,000 of them) have to be factored in. Then incumbents (Chan Wai Chi, the No. 2 on Ng Kuok Cheong’s list; Melinda Chan Mei Yi, the one least well elected in 2009), new comers on well-established lists (Si Ka Lon, Chan Meng Kam’s No. 2; Lam Lon Wai, Kwan Tsui Hang’s No. 2; and Wong Kit Cheng, Ho Ian Song’s No. 2) as well as novel challengers (Agnes Lam and Jason Chao) all stand an almost equal chance of winning.
Combine the need and craving for change with an unduly limited window of competitive opportunity, and you are almost for sure heading for a bloodthirsty electoral clash, one in which social media could very well serve an extreme role in twisting the campaign towards a negative style, thus exposing the hypocrisy of a few and the distrust in many. And in Macao, nobody needs to be reminded that “a throw of the dice will never abolish chance.”

Published in Macau Daily Times, August 30th 2013