Kapok: Moaners

When I voiced concern in my column last February that Ho Iat Seng, the newly sworn-in president of the Legislative Assembly, was openly deploring the lack of “legal training” of legislators and thus questioning their ability to grasp public policy issues, and that Chan Chak Mo, the president of the second permanent commission of the same Assembly, was caught saying legislators should refrain from drafting “projects” of law and exclusively let the government make law “proposals”, I did so in pointing out that these two respectable figures of our community had basically decided on their own to interpret the Basic Law and let go of a key component of the legislators’ power, that is precisely to initiate legislation, as stipulated in article 75 of the Basic Law.

The right of initiative held by legislators is indeed true power and constitutes one of the few “actual” prerogatives that mitigates the derogatory judgment that the Macao legislature is nothing but a “rubber stamp” assembly—toothless and, above all, indefectible, as a whole, in its support to the executive. Power as it allows at minima to elevate the gravitas of the debate and help clarify the stand of each and every stakeholder: a good example of that is the Law on the Fundamental Rights to form Trade Unions that has been pushed by José Pereira Coutinho several times and got defeated (again) in April by just 14 votes to 9. Power as it forces the government to change its order of priority when it comes to policy-making: again, I believe that it is Coutinho’s continuous drive to have an Animal Protection Law that ultimately forced the municipal affairs administration (IACM) to come up with a law that was unanimously introduced in the first reading last month, whereas the IACM had been “promising” that law for more than a decade. And finally, the capacity to “make” a law and not only to vote on or amend it epitomizes the essence of the “legislative power” of that branch of government: the Law on the Protection of Private Data, which was considered up to this summer one of the most advanced pieces of legislation when it comes to the protection of citizens’ rights, was indeed introduced in 2005 by a collective of 8 legislators, including 3 directly elected ones.
If this right to properly raise awareness, set the agenda of policy-making and legislate is forfeited, what is left then? Mere complaints that the government is not fast or good enough? If Melinda Chan champions the rights of the children so much, why doesn’t she come up with a piece of legislation herself? There are plenty of legal advisors in town to help her out—both in Portuguese and Chinese, and outside or inside the Assembly. But the problem is precisely that most of the businessmen-turned politicians conceive their role as having somewhat to do with populist brawling and badly acted moaning.
How can one otherwise explain the high-pitched whining of Mak Soi Kun regarding the noise disturbance generated by the Grand Prix whereas the Law on the Prevention and Control of Environmental Noise had already been voted in August, including favorably by himself? What credit can we give to legislators’ complaints about the level of execution of the government’s budget in November when the second permanent commission never found the time to review the mid-year report provided by the government in August? One of my friends who owns a pretty big business in China has the following slogan plastered on all the walls of his factory: “Winners find solutions, losers only find excuses.” No chance of losing when the game is not opened to competition.
And mind you, legislators cannot really propose laws on every single topic and issue: public expenditure, political structure or the operation of the government are expressly (and safely) out of bound. Legislators Ng Kuok Cheong and Au Kam San had thus to propose a mere debate on political reform and the implementation of universal suffrage in Macao. Expectedly, the proposal was vetoed by 27 legislators out of 33: when concerns get crucial and opinions become power, silence is then golden.

Published in Macau Daily Times, November 21 2014.

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