Government-hosted electoral forums for the upcoming Legislative Council (LegCo) elections premiered yesterday with subdued interactions among candidates, signaling a shift toward policy dissemination rather than fierce debate under the new “patriots governing Hong Kong” framework. Forums covering the New Territories Southwest and New Territories Northeast direct constituencies featured limited mutual questioning, with candidates primarily using their allotted time to outline political platforms, leading critics to describe the events as “policy monologues” rather than robust debates. The lack of traditional verbal clashes highlights the emphasis on “healthy competition,” eschewing direct attacks and mudslinging, according to political observers.
The structure of the initial forums appeared to restrict spontaneous exchanges. During the New Territories Southwest session, despite the host explicitly allowing candidates to pose questions to rivals, four consecutive rounds of speaking passed without any direct cross-examination. Candidates, such as Chan Wing-yan of the Federation of Trade Unions (FTU), briefly attempted to raise local economic data but ultimately reverted to self-narration, continuing to detail their own manifestos.
Format Limits Robust Debate
Sources close to the administration suggest that the format—which involved five candidates speaking sequentially with short time allocations—discouraged deep engagement. Candidates reportedly feared that spending precious minutes responding to rivals would leave them less time to articulate their overarching platforms, creating the perception of being “led by the opponent.”
Veteran political figures acknowledged the dampened atmosphere. One senior pro-establishment figure remarked that while the push for “healthy competition” removed toxicity, the minimal interaction rendered the forums dull and less effective at capturing public attention. They suggested that clear, incisive responses to opponents could actually serve as a positive differentiator for candidates.
The New Territories Northeast forum saw slightly more interaction, with candidates briefly debating the economic value of eco-tourism and environmental protection. However, the strict 30-second response limit severely curtailed the potential for substantive discussion.
The Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Erick Tsang Kwok-wai, who attended the initial forums, maintained that the atmosphere was “enthusiastic” and reaffirmed the government’s aim for a “high-quality electoral culture.”
‘Polling Well’ Rumors Add Early Drama
Despite the publicly harmonious atmosphere, underlying campaign tensions surfaced during the government-mandated proceedings. During her closing statement, FTU candidate Chan Wing-yan urgently appealed to voters not to believe “rumors that I already have enough votes,” implying potential sabotage from rivals. Other campaign teams denied circulating or hearing such whispers, suggesting the appeal could be an early “cry for help” tactic.
This issue of “enough votes” rumors appears to be a broader campaign challenge. Earlier in the process, FTU President Wu Chi-wai, running in Hong Kong Island East, and Judy Chan Ka-pui in Hong Kong Island West both publicly refuted claims that their victories were assured or that they faced no electoral pressure.
Seasoned election strategists view these rumors as a common tactic often aimed at strong candidates to encourage complacency among their supporters, potentially leading to a “high-start, low-finish” outcome. Historically, such disinformation has been used to swing undecided voters toward candidates perceived as vulnerable.
Government Takes Full Control of Forums
In a move to boost voter turnout and ensure standardized candidate exposure, the government is unprecedentedly organizing all 39 electoral forums, broadcast live by RTHK. This mandate ensures that all approved candidates must face the public and eliminates the past scenario where some candidates refused to share a stage.
Political sources indicated that while private media organizations had planned to host more combative forums, candidates are expected to attend only the government-sponsored events. This consolidation is seen by some pro-establishment figures as a way to control the narrative, particularly with many legislative newcomers, ensuring they “avoid mutual attacks” and prevent “new recruits from misspeaking.”
The full orchestration of the debates by the government ensures a predictable environment aimed at demonstrating the merit of policy over personality, though critics suggest it comes at the expense of genuine democratic scrutiny and public engagement. The focus now shifts to whether the emphasis on policy discourse can translate into significant voter enthusiasm on election day.
Leave a Reply