Chow Pak-chin argues that the opposition camp is increasingly resorting to extreme filibustering tactics to the detriment of the rest of Hong Kong society

To delay deliberations on the government's non-binding motion on the co-location arrangement at the West Kowloon Station of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL), "pan-democrat" lawmakers have resorted to irrational and sometimes crazy tactics.

In last week's meeting, they surprisingly invoked the unprecedented Section 1 from Paragraph 88 of Legislative Council's Rules of Procedure. Eddie Chu Hoi-dick launched a motion to have the press and public cleared from the chamber and stop the meeting being broadcast. Chu argued he also had to force the meeting to have an additional debate in order to stall the voting, and claimed he had no other choice.

It is ironic that Chu used to be a newspaper reporter; his allies in the opposition camp are always proud of being "defenders of press freedom". However, Chu's motion of Paragraph 88(1) showed a double standard when it comes to freedom of the press and also to scrutiny by the public.

Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said she was "very sad, very disappointed and very frustrated" by the latest filibusters. Most of the news media industry felt the same. Opposition lawmakers have already greatly abused the core values of Hong Kong for their selfish political ends. Their tactics are now becoming more extreme - including meaningless headcounts for quorums and forcing the discussions to focus on an unrelated bill.

Why couldn't the opposition filibuster in other ways? Chu was quite honest; he indicated that the opposition has exhausted all other means.

Mainstream public opinion does not object to the co-location arrangement. In fact Hong Kong people are looking forward to the XRL being commissioned as soon as possible. This is something that is giving the opposition camp problems; they can no longer rely on one of their favorite tactics - exploiting popular opinion - on this issue. Some 36 hours had been spent over two weeks debating the matter. During this time the opposition could not offer any new arguments other than that the government should provide more materials or the possibility of conducting the co-location of checkpoints at Futian in Shenzhen.

It is often said the old days are the best; some in the opposition must be thinking this now. In last year's Legislative Council election Lee Cheuk-yan, Cyd Ho Sau-lan, Raymond Wong Yuk-man, Frederick Fung Kin-kee and Gary Fan Kwok-wai - six opposition veterans - were replaced by new radicals. At least four more veterans gave LegCo seats to young members in their party. This included Albert Ho Chun-Yan, Emily Lau Wai-hing, Sin Chung-kai and Alan Leong Kah-kit. But their intentions in passing the baton to younger people have been dashed after six of the new opposition lawmakers were disqualified in the first year of their five-year term.

If the old guards were still in charge, they might have been able to come up with a less ridiculous tactics than tabling a motion to expel all journalists and members of the public from the chamber.

Charles Peter Mok, the new convener of opposition lawmakers, repeatedly stressed the opposition parties were very united. But if there was internal solidarity, why did Mok keep telling everyone, including his allies, about it on TV?

The most ridiculous scene happened a few days ago. Yau Wai-ching, who was disqualified on her 11th day after entering LegCo because of anti-China antics during the swearing-in ceremony, asked Lau Siu-lai, one of her allies a year ago, to make way for her in a by-election. Is this the so-called "internal solidarity" of the opposition camp?

As the opposition camp weakens, the pro-establishment camp should seize the opportunity to bring order to LegCo. I'm delighted they have proposed amendments to LegCo Rules of Procedure. This is after Chan Kin-por, chairman of Finance Committee, executed "chairman's directives" to stop filibusters. The pro-establishment's amendment concerning Paragraph 88 Section 1 is urgently needed.

Criticism on the pro-establishment camp of taking advantage of the opposition's difficulties is complete nonsense. Almost every pro-establishment lawmaker had pledged to amend the Rules of Procedure when they were running for election. Besides, there is nothing wrong with "taking advantage" of things in politics. This has often been the case in the European and US politics which the opposition always refers to.

There is a slim chance that the opposition will not be able to create chaos in LegCo meetings any more. I really hope the pro-establishment camp can speed up the process of important bills concerning people's livelihoods. After all this should be the real work of lawmakers.

(HK Edition 11/10/2017 page12)