Advertisement
Advertisement
Hong Kong Budget 2016-2017
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
Pro-establishment lawmakers condemn the adjournment. Photo: SCMP Pictures

Hong Kong Legislative Council budget debate adjourned as not enough lawmakers present in chamber

Pro-establishment members blame pan-democrats for the adjournment, saying 10 hours of debate has been wasted; the other camp disagrees

The Legislative Council meeting scrutinising the government’s budget was adjourned on Thursday because not enough lawmakers were in attendance.

Thirty-four lawmakers were present in the chamber, one short of the required 35, after radical pan-democrat Raymond Chan Chi-chuen called for a quorum count, the seventh one requested during the meeting.

Hong Kong Legco president Jasper Tsang slashes number of budget amendments from 2,168 to 407

Legco president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing announced an end to the meeting at 12.28pm, around three hours into Thursday’s session.

At the time of the adjournment, only three pan-democrat lawmakers – the Labour Party’s Cyd Ho Sau-lan, the Democratic Party’s Sin Chung-kai and the Civic Party’s Alan Leong Ka-Kit – were in attendance.

Prior to the adjournment, lawmakers were debating amendments to the budget.

Earlier, the Legco president announced that he expected lawmakers to vote on the government blueprint on May 11 after slashing the number of amendments from 2,168 to just 407 in an attempt to contain the filibuster by radical legislators, who complained that the fiscal blueprint neglected the poor.

Pro-establishment lawmakers laid the blame for the adjournment squarely on the pan-democrats, accusing them of deliberately not showing up.

Democratic Party backs budget plan in rare show of support for Hong Kong’s finance chief

Lawmaker Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen of the Business and Professionals Alliance said it was regrettable that lawmakers had lost more than 10 hours of time set aside to scrutinise the blueprint due to the adjournment.

“I saw a number of pan-democrats loitering around outside the chamber and they were not willing to go inside. Attending Legco meetings is the responsibility of all legislators,” Leung said.

But League of Social Democrats lawmaker “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung hit back at the pro-establishment camp’s claim.

He said since there were 43 lawmakers from their camp, it would not be difficult to find enough people to make up the quorum.

“If all of them are [in the chamber] ... there’s nothing we can do,” he said.

Moments before the adjournment, two pan-democrat lawmakers – the Association for Democracy and People’s Livelihood’s Frederick Fung Kin-kee and the Neighbourhood and Worker’s Service Centre’s Leung Yiu-chung – could be seen outside the chamber.

Fung denied he deliberately stayed outside the meeting venue, explaining that he was conducting an interview with the press and was not aware there were only a few seconds left before the quorum bell stopped ringing.

“It was an unintentional mistake. I did not deliberately want the meeting to be adjourned,” he said.

Leung similarly said he was being interviewed by the press and only realised there weren’t enough lawmakers in the chamber at the very last moment.

It was the seventh time that the Legco meeting was adjourned since the legislative year started in October last year, and the 14th time since the Legco term started in October 2012.

Throughout the legislative year, lawmakers from across the political divide have tried on numerous occasions to outmanoeuvre one another over the quorum bell.

Following Thursday’s adjournment, pro-establishment lawmakers laid the blame squarely on pan-democrats, accusing them of deliberately not showing up.

Speaking after a public function, Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah expressed disappointment that the meeting had been adjourned.

“I believe people feel the same because the appropriation bill is important and urgent for society,” he said. “I just hope that they would be practical about this, and don’t do anything that would damage the benefit of our people.”

Post